Nothing Sacred: The Truth about Judaism by Douglas Rushkoff Book Review


I had known about Rushkoff’s treatment of Judaism; Nothing Sacred: The Truth about Judaism, for some time and had always meant to read and review it.[i]

A video of Rushkoff discussing his take on Judaism surfaced online reminiscent of the infamous ‘Barbara Spectre moment’ – that is a political gaffe from the tribe’s mouth. We can say these “Spectre moments” are when a Jewish cultural distorter candidly discusses Jewish cultural distortion on non-Jews and their nations as Rushkoff does:

“The thing that makes Judaism dangerous to everybody, to every race, to every nation, to every idea, is that we smash things that aren’t true, we don’t believe in the boundaries of nation-state, we don’t believe in the ideas of these individual gods that protect individual groups of people, these are all artificial constructions and Judaism really teaches us how to see that. In a sense our detractors have us right, in that we are a corrosive force, we’re breaking down the false gods of all nations and all people because they’re not real and that’s very upsetting to people.”

The reason Jews like Rushkoff and Barbara Spectre allow themselves to speak candidly about Jewish social engineering, affirming what their ‘detractors’ accuse Jews of is because they believe that by manipulating gentile societies they are doing the world a service – that they are in fact doing God’s work. By undermining their host nations so as to bring about conditions of disunity, Jews, like Rushkoff and Spectre, believe that in performing this role of ‘a corrosive force;’ “breaking down the false gods of all nations and all people,” that they are performing a mitzvah as part of their god-ordained task of tikkun olam. A mitzvah is translated as a ‘commandment’ but more commonly means a good deed done from religious duty. Rushkoff describes tikkun olam as “a poetic way of expressing the responsibility Jews have to ‘heal the earth.’[ii] In my two part essay on integration Manspreading for Lebestrum, when I discuss the HBO series Show me a Hero, based on a book by Jewish New York Times writer Lisa Belkin about the integration struggle in Yonkers between the NAACP their Jewish lawyers and the ethnic whites of Yonkers, we can discern the same underlying self-justification:


“Belkin seeks to frame the issue of integration in terms of a progressive Jewish solution to the Jewish problem, while fully retaining her Jewishness. When asked about the overtly Jewish role in integration, Belkin neither denies nor downplays the Jewish role. Instead she invokes the Jewish religious principle of Tiklun Olam, a Hebrew phrase meaning ‘repairing the world.’ Tiklun Olam, was described by Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch in terms of a Kehilla (community) of Jews in galut (diaspora) successfully influencing their non-Jewish neighbors.”[iii]

We’re destroying your culture for your own good, trust us.

What Jews like Rushkoff, Specter and Belkin affirm is that what “anti-semites” claim; that Jewish manipulation is real and corrosive is true; they agree the “Jewish conspiracy” is real but it is a matter of interpretation and the “anti-semite” is simply a gentile with the wrong interpretation simply because Jews know better. “The Jews unique position as perpetual outsiders led them to adopt and promote a wide range of cosmopolitan and inclusive business strategies and ethical standards.”[iv] Thus, diaspora Jews living in host nations seeking to ‘influence’ their non-Jewish neighbors in a manner which is demonstrably detrimental to their hosts (by mudding the authentic bonds of organic society; Tonnies’ Total Gesellschaft) and beneficial to Jews, as Rushkoff acknowledges, “A fluid society with ever-changing boundaries served them better than a closed or static one in which outsiders and new ideas were feared,”[v] is interpreted by Jews as a gift or a service they are rendering onto their Gentile neighbours.


Rushkoff and Belkin make Jewish social engineering into a fundamental religious precept inherent in Judaism rather and sometimes partially acknowledged as a diaspora social-political strategy to weaken the host; “It is not only our tradition, but our explicit obligation to act as stewards for the greater society.”[vi] To this end Rushkoff discusses the widely known Jewish role in desegregation and integration; “In 1952, the American Jewish Congress worked with the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP) to target unfair housing policy. Through a series of legal battles, American Jewish Congress attorneys ended the whites-only policy of New York City’s Stuyvesant Town, setting an important legal precedent against discrimination in housing projects that received any amount of public aid.”[vii]

You wonder where Antifa gets it from?

What is interesting is that Rushkoff subtly acknowledges the self-serving and contingent strategic basis of such practices, something Karl Popper, the Jewish philosopher of the ‘Open Society,’ never could. Popper in his The Open Society and its Enemies, expressed the same desires for a universalist, cosmopolitan, pluralist, liberal society yet Popper rightly concluded that these values were largely the opposite of the Jewish religion, which according to Popper,[viii] and most all scholars of comparative religions i.e. Hegel, is a tribal supremacist ‘closed society,’ whereas Rushkoff through his deconstructionist self-serving modern revisionist interpretation  Judaism proper becomes the wellspring from which ‘open society’ values spring. While Popper denied the very Jewish strategic basis of his viewpoint, conservative Jew Malachi Haim Hacohen, who is a foremost Popper scholar and critic, points towards Popper’s assimilated Ashkenazi Jewishness as the main source of his political viewpoint: “Cosmopolitanism appealed to Popper and liberal Jews precisely because of their life in between cultures and their indeterminate identity. Claiming membership in an imagined cosmopolitan community, Popper rejected Jewish identity. “I do not consider myself ‘an assimilated German Jew,’” he told a critic of his Autobiography, “this is how ‘the Fuhrer would have considered me.”[ix]

Enlightenment philosophers often portrayed the Jew as the counter-universal, especially Voltaire.[x] Popper refused to see the Jewish basis for his commitment to Kant’s cosmopolitanism, instead he would have sided with Marx and declared, “the question is not the emancipation of the Jews, but, rather, emancipation from the Jews… The emancipation of the Jews . . . is the emancipation of humanity from Judaism.” In so far as Popper admonished Judaism as a tribalist cult of the ‘closed society,’ Rushkoff seeks to re-interpret and thus salvage Judaism by imagining that the social engineering that Jews have been engaged in during modernity is actually the philosophical and moral foundations of Judaism itself. But because Jews are able to successfully carry out radical changes in gentile society because of their internal cohesion; their sense of mission as Jews, the changes they bring about are specifically designed to fragment the internal cohesion, the sense of ‘we’ of their hosts. The very success of the Jews working as groups of Jews undermines their stated purpose towards tolerance and plurality as inherently beneficial. Thus, the changes they established in immigration, desegregation, and integration can only be viewed as acts of subversion.

The problem herein is that Jewish tribalism and secular universalism are antithetical, and hence the assimilated Jew, especially if they are conscious of maintaining their Jewishness, is involved in a kind of fraud and deception. Rushkoff in the face of all prevailing evidence, of which he himself acknowledges, “True enough, my entire premise is contradicted by the many ways our own myths and customs have always been profoundly steeped in racial and ethnic assumptions. There are as many warnings in the Torah to kill our tribal neighbors as there are encouragements to embrace them. A good number of our most observant members ground their faith and pride in the Torah’s plentiful admonitions not to mix with other, lesser people[xi] attempts to transform Judaism into a ‘social justice’ religion. Rushkoff explains the Jewish strategy; “Anti-semites are not entirely unfounded in their claim that Jews are behind a great media conspiracy… If there is an agenda underlying Jews’ dedication to expanding the role of media in people’s lives, it is to promote intellectual perspective and the value of pluralism.”[xii] ‘Intellectual perspective’ herein is a lighter euphemism for the values and perspectives of the Jews. “Media, then, at its best, is a form of mass education” meaning brainwashing. “The more interconnected a society, the more likely it was to engage in complex transactions requiring Jews’ service. And the more inclusive and tolerant a society, the more likely it was to include the Jews, too.” Is this not ‘diversity is good because it is good for the Jews?[xiii]


[i] It was some years ago that I first encountered Jewish author Douglas Rushkoff. I read his Life Inc: How Corporatism Conquered the World, and How We Can Take it Back. This was a part of a resurgence of far-left anti-corporatism, such as Jewish author Naomi Klein’s No Logo, and the film The Corporation (2003) by Jewish-Canadian filmmaker Mark Achbar. Having never abandoned a belief in socialist leanings and the negative effects of unbridled capitalism there was something to glean out of these student day forays of mine.

I recall even now that the central problem with Rushkoff’s book was the superficial quality of it; he attempted to fill pages buttressing his specious arguments with name-dropping and platitudes instead of real critical analysis to give the book the illusion of weight rather than internal cohesion. It had the same kind of swindling fraudulent quality as Jonah Lehrer’s work.

[ii] ” Rushkoff, Douglas. Nothing sacred : the truth about Judaism. New York: Crown Publishers, 2003. Print. 36.


[iii] “Manspreading for Lebensraum, Part 1 and 2 – Alex Fontana.” 30 Sep. 2017, Accessed 28 Feb. 2018.

[iv] Rushkoff, Douglas. Nothing sacred : the truth about Judaism. New York: Crown Publishers, 2003. Print. 06.


[v] Rushkoff, Douglas. Nothing sacred : the truth about Judaism. New York: Crown Publishers, 2003. Print. 07.

[vi] Rushkoff, Douglas. Nothing sacred : the truth about Judaism. New York: Crown Publishers, 2003. Print. 04.

[vii] Rushkoff, Douglas. Nothing sacred : the truth about Judaism. New York: Crown Publishers, 2003. Print. 41.


[viii] “Hearing as a young boy the biblical story of the Golden Calf, said Popper, he had recognized the roots of religious intolerance in Jewish monotheism. The Hebrew Bible was the fountainhead of tribal nationalism. Oppressed and persecuted, exilic Jews created the doctrine of the Chosen People, presaging modern visions of chosen class and race. Both Roman imperialism and early Christian humanitarianism threatened the Jews’ tribal exclusivism. Jewish orthodoxy reacted by reinforcing tribal bonds, shutting Jews off from the world for two millennia. The ghetto was the ultimate closed society, a “petrified form of Jewish tribalism.” 120 Its inhabitants lived in misery, ignorance, and superstition. Their separate existence evoked the suspicion and hatred of non-Jews and fueled antisemitism.” Hacohen, M. (1999). Dilemmas of Cosmopolitanism: Karl Popper, Jewish Identity, and “Central European Culture”. The Journal of Modern History, 71(1), 105-149.

[ix] “The ambiguity of Austrian nationality gave Jews an opportunity missing elsewhere for negotiating Jewish and national identity. Jews were the only ethnic group to adopt enthusiastically the official Staatsgedanke.

The politics of Jewish identity was notoriously contentious, but poor Galician traditionalists and re-fined Viennese assimilationists, orthodox rabbis and liberal scholars, Zionists and socialists, all declared their loyalty to the dynasty and the supranational empire. “Jews are the standard-bearers of the Austrian idea of unity,” stated the liberal Viennese rabbi Adolf Jellinek.” Hacohen, M. (1999). Dilemmas of Cosmopolitanism: Karl Popper, Jewish Identity, and “Central European Culture”. The Journal of Modern History, 71(1), 105-149.

[x] Arkush, Allan. “Voltaire on Judaism and Christianity.” AJS Review, vol. 18, no. 2, 1993, pp. 223–243.}

[xi] Rushkoff, Douglas. Nothing sacred : the truth about Judaism. New York: Crown Publishers, 2003. Print. 176.

[xii] Rushkoff, Douglas. Nothing sacred : the truth about Judaism. New York: Crown Publishers, 2003. Print.  8.

[xiii] If real unity comes from a shared sense of ‘we’ that is internal cohesion,Prior to the changes wrought about by special interests groups in the Anglosphere’s immigration policies (1965 US, 1967 Canada, 1972 Australia) collectively neologized as “globalized integration strategy,” (GIS) immigration was dictated in terms of racial-cultural preference. As such the idea of the melting pot was one based on shared culture, race and civilizational bloc. The idea was to create a melted European-American. As such the bio-politics of Europe have been left behind in favor of what I have elsewhere called “elective affinities.” Elective Affinities denote the linear and interconnected tradition of Western Civilization and peoples – we feel ourselves to be a part of European Civilization. As such the crude biological determinism of Nordic supremacy has betrayed the more rational argument of in-group preference ‘a shared sense of we’ as Charles Maurras put it “Jews threatened the integral nation not by their blood but by their own nonlinear history and alternative tradition, by the disruption to integral form their presence within the nation provoked in the nation-work. The Jew is the ultimate figure of the non-Greek or anti-Greek (and thus the non-French or anti-French…”) See:

Carroll, David. French literary fascism : nationalism, anti-Semitism, and the ideology of culture. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1995. Print. 88.

Maurras is essentially holding the same views held by Voltaire, “The nucleus of Voltaire’s view of the Jews, however, amounts to this: there is a cultural, philosophical, and ethnic tradition of Europe which descended, through the human stock of that continent, from the intellectual values that were taught by the Greeks. Those were in turn carried to all the reaches of the European world by the Romans. This is the normative culture of which Voltaire approved. The Jews are a different family, and their religion is rooted in their character.” See: Arkush, Allan. “Voltaire on Judaism and Christianity.” AJS Review, vol. 18, no. 2, 1993, pp. 223–243. It is now only with Rushkoff does the Jew have his cake and gets eat it to.

Manspreading for Lebensraum, Part 1 and 2

Originally Published but removed at:

Bill the Buther

by Alex Fontana

“Integration is the time between the first black family moving in and the last white family moving out” — Saul Alinsky

As is the Microcosm, so is the Macrocosm

THE FEMINIST ‘social justice’ campaign first launched on Twitter against “manspreading” has made the male practice of sitting a little too comfortably in a public space into a criminal offense. The arrests that have resulted from this criminalization of public posture represent a fundamental attack upon our personal freedoms and on our own ability to govern ourselves in social situations without resorting to overarching laws and policing. John Stuart Mill’s Harm Principle has taken a modern, politically correct turn for the worse. (ILLUSTRATION: Localized ethnic unity, a threat to the system.)

This also represents an attack on males, but even more so on White males, who have literally had their living spaces invaded and have been forced to squeeze aside for the ‘leg room’ of hordes of non-Whites.

The eunuch mandarins of the Liberal Left of course seem unaware that men’s genitals hang outside the body thus necessitating a spreading of the lower limbs for basic comfort. As of now, detachable penises are still not widely enough available on the market to necessitate a one-size-fits-all posture. Bruce Jenner’s hermaphroditic transformation is being so publicly lauded precisely because it symbolically represents the castration of the White male as patriarchal master signifier.

As every White country becomes flooded with non-White hordes, as our countries become increasingly not our own, as even our communities are no longer our own, why should our personal space be exempted from the general trend? This continuum of dispossession is not an accident. It is no mere coincidence that many ‘caught-on-video’ racist outbursts occur while on public transportation.

The experience of public transportation in diversified metropolises can often have the jarring effect of revealing the emptiness at the heart of our social order. The tram itself functions as a kind of metaphor for the modern world, a constantly moving, deracinated conglomerate — machines dragging the masses of humanity to their destinations, all atomized and automated, a world far removed from the rootedness of blood and soil.

Dindu NY Subway
An overly social space is inevitably an antisocial space.

The general experience of shuffling multiracial crowds onto a packed, one-size-fits-all transport system, for the sole purpose of atomized economic competition and relentless movement, reduces the city to a brutal machine. Each person is further reduced to representing the soullessness of the theory of perfect competition — unrestrained self-interest supposedly leading to the “maximization” of all participants, but in reality leading to their alienation and anomie.

When a marginalized White, finds himself a waif in his own country and looks around the bus or train — possibly he is standing because non-Whites are occupying all the available seats — he gets a sense of these non-Whites pushing him out and perhaps stealing his job through “equal opportunity employment” or leeching off his taxes.

This, along with the “leveling” of the global economic playing field, means the creation of an underclass of dispossessed Whites, psychologically unable to fight back due to disempowering ideas like “white privilege.”


The latest attempt to encroach on the living space of Whites is coming from the Obama administration:

“The Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule, a proposal from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), is aimed at ending segregation found in communities across the nation.”

This mandate follows a Supreme Court decision that the 1968 Fair Housing Act aimed to prevent more than just intentional discrimination, and that the federal government has the right to use HUD to enforce integration on areas it deems to be too White. This new legislation would require cities and towns to scrutinize their racial makeup and report every three to five years on unintended racial bias in housing.

Closely monitored by the social engineers
Closely monitored by the social engineers

The National Housing Act of 1934 created the Federal Housing Administration as part of Roosevelt’s New Deal. Also called the Wagner-Steagall Act, it set up the United States Housing Authority to provide subsidies from the federal government to local public housing agencies, to improve the conditions of low-income families.

Catherine Bauer, who co-authored the Housing Act, was not Jewish but was a close friend of Bob Marshall whose father Louis had founded the American Jewish Committee. As such, Bauer had close links to Jewish groups, which would also explain why she was interested in studying the “recent achievements and policies in housing and city and regional planning in the U.S.S.R.” She was also an advocate of ‘sexual liberty,’ and a disciple of the Bauhaus architect Walter Gropius, who, unable to find accommodation with the Nazis, finally emigrated to the States after flirting with the Soviet Union.

In his book The Slaughter of Cities: Urban Renewal As Ethnic Cleansing, E.M. Jones quotes a revealing speech Gropius gave in the Soviet Union:

“Without the liberation of the land out of this private slavery, it is impossible to create a healthy, development-capable urban renewal that is economic in terms of society in general. Only the Soviet Union has fulfilled this most important requirement without reservation, and thereby opened the way for a truly modern urban planning.” (Page 83)

Shortly after this speech, Gropius became the chairman of the architecture department at Harvard. From then on, he refrained from using phrases like the “immoral right of private ownership.” Instead, he talked about things like “our belief in democratic government.”

While Bauhaus is routinely praised as a forward-looking and disinterested modernist architectural movement, the truth is quite different. In his book From Bauhaus to Our House (1986), Tom Wolfe criticizes Bauhaus as creating buildings that resemble “a duplicating-machine replacement parts wholesale distribution warehouse,” and likening their model for houses to an “insecticide refinery.” For Wolfe such architecture was a “reprimand for the fat on one’s bourgeois soul.”


The “vision” of replacing the humble row house with Bauhaus architecture was interlaced with notions of social engineering. Bauhaus, also known as the “international style,” was in Jones’ words “the architectural expression of social engineering.” Gropius was head of the school of architecture at Harvard, while László Moholy-Nagy, a Hungarian Jew, opened the New Bauhaus that would become the Chicago School of Design.

Given Bauhaus’s radical leftism and obvious Jewish elements, you may not be surprised to learn that Tel Aviv has the largest collection of buildings built in the “international style” anywhere in the world:

“Bauhaus architecture flourished in Tel Aviv (as elsewhere in the country) in the 1930s due in great part to the fact that 17 former Bauhaus students, worked locally as architects.”

Housing, however, did not truly become a social justice issue until the Fair Housing Act, a corollary of Lyndon Johnson’s 1968 Civil Rights Act. When Johnson inaugurated the act he thanked “the public housing experiments of the 1930s and 1940s, led by that great adventurer, Nathan Strauss, in the Roosevelt administration.” Strauss was the son of a wealthy Jewish merchant who co-owned Macy’s department store.

Persistance of SegFrom its inception through to its realization, integrated urban planning has had a strong Jewish influence, raising the suspicion that one of its aims was to create a form of social engineering that could break the bonds of kinship that would otherwise naturally form amongst European Americans.

As we see from the infographic (right), “integration” and “desegregation” are code words for taking away White living space. By contrast, there is no talk of forcefully integrating areas with high concentrations of Blacks. As you can see, Black neighborhoods have grown and spread, strongly White areas have become negligible, and gray areas, neither entirely White nor Black, have proliferated. This urban level of integration is a micro manifestation of the macro process of global multiculturalism, in which only white countries are forced to integrate.

In The Slaughter of Cities, Jones tells us that “the Quakers and the Jews were allies in the housing struggles in post-war Chicago.” From this image (below) we see that violent crimes are predominately in areas with high concentrations of Blacks, while those areas with the least violent crimes have fewer Blacks.


We also see from this graphic of Palestine that what is occurring on both a macro and micro level in the US and in Europe is analogous to the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people. While blacks and Jews both prefer to view themselves as the victims, it is plain to see that they are the ones gaining new ground. Diversity really does mean chasing down the last white person.



There is a long precedence of the federal government dangling the carrot of funds and the stick of criminal conviction in order to implement “integration” in US cities. The first time this strategy was implemented, it was, as now, a bi-partisan effort. As E. Michael Jones explains in The Slaughter of Cities:

“Upper-class WASPs, largely Episcopalian and Quaker, united politically with the blacks they brought up from the South to work in their factories during World War II to defeat the group in the middle, namely, the largely Catholic ethnics who lived in neighborhoods like Kensington.”

The World Wars facilitated the process wherein unprecedented levels of social engineering could occur through the implementation of federal government centralization under wartime provisions, that bypassed local lawmakers and normal democratic processes.

We can identify a three-pronged process, in which Obama’s “Fair Housing” campaign is but the latest stage. The first stage corresponds to the shaping of ‘public opinion’ through the growth of the mass media. The second stage arrives with the Roosevelt New Deal, which gave the Federal government increased powers over housing, and removed the right of eminent domain from property owners. The third stage can be linked with the reformulation of civil rights as a housing issue, which then sought to take away White spaces from White ethics.

The First World War facilitated the formation of something akin to a socially-engineered national consciousness. A supposed democracy like America ostensibly required a majority consensus to get into the war on the side of Britain. The Committee on Public Information was formed in order to overcome the historical neutrality of American opinion and its anti-interventionist nature.

Not good for White spaces
Not good for White spaces

The sinking of the Lusitania by a German U-boat, resulting in the deaths of 114 Americans, greatly helped, even though the ship had been smuggling American munitions and contraband for the British war effort. As the influential Jewish journalist Walter Lippmann explained: “While the war continued it very largely succeeded, I believe, in creating something that might almost be called one public opinion all over America.”

The forging of this public opinion was in answer to the psychological requirements of the war, as Lippmann was well aware. His experience as a Captain in army intelligence during WWI shaped his perception of journalism as “intelligence work” serving as a go-between between policymakers and the public. Lippmann believed that “a specialized class whose interests reach beyond the locality” had to decide the public’s beliefs for them.

 Over time this process would take on an increasingly Jewish character, with Jewish elites exerting more influence through their ability to frame public opinion. The radical effects of this on American public opinion can be seen in issues like miscegenation, where the 4% approval rate in 1958 has been changed to 87% today.

Lippmann and Edward Bernays, someone else who worked in intelligence and propaganda during WWI, and later Louis Wirth, who worked for the OSS in WWII, were Jews who were able to rise within elitist circles, because:

“Unlike nativists and people like Henry Ford, the East Coast WASP elite was perfectly willing to adopt Jews into their class if the adoptee was willing to espouse the same Enlightenment environmentalist philosophy they espoused…” (The Slaughter of Cities, p.106)

Thus a strange assortment of bedfellows — Jewish brains, East WASP elitist ethnocentrism, and Negro numbers — converged to dismantle and destroy the cohesion of ‘ethnic’ neighborhoods, mostly directed at Southern and Eastern Europeans, like Poles, Czechs and Italians, but also Irish and Germans, whose Catholicism threatened the WASP establishment.

White ethnic America
White ethnic America

Jones points to Paul Blandshard’s anti-Catholic bestseller, American freedom and Catholic power, as expressing the idea that Catholicism represented an “impassible barrier to democratization” and a danger to WASP power.


Blandshard was a liberal protestant minister who dropped out of the ministry in favor of socialism, sexual liberation, and the WASP positivist school of Bertrand Russell and John Dewey. His views of cultural anthropology were seeped in heavy doses of materialism and atheism derived from Comte, leading to his belief that man was a product of his environment who could be molded — i.e. socially engineered. Both the WASP elite and the Jews shared this view as well as suspicions about Catholicism, which was seen as inherently fascistic:

“In fact both Blanshard and Bertrand Russell would claim that Catholicism and fascism were politically indistinguishable” (The Slaughter of Cities, p.101).

Jones points to the WASP fear that Catholics were taking over the country numerically, because unlike the WASPs who had embraced birth control, they procreated. As Blandshard put it, “in the name of religion, the hierarchy fights birth control and divorce laws in all states… and censors the cultural diet of these children.” The last part can be read as Catholics rejecting the propaganda of WASPs and their Jewish coconspirators like Lippmann and Wirth.

The threat that ethnic whites presented was therefore both numerical and cultural, but as Jones tells us, these Catholics lacked a cohesive group consciousness — i.e. as a shared Catholic ‘ethnic group’ — that could protect their interests, unlike the enemies who conspired against them.

Bertrand Russell, the influential British philosopher who helped shape American WASP opinion was a driving force. E.M Jones refers to his program for social reform:

“Many observers are astonished at how pervasive its provisions are today. To illustrate, we will look at four of his key tenets: sexual liberation and the destruction of the nuclear family; social control through the means of psychology and the use of addictive and psycho-tropic drugs; one-world government; and population control.”

In case anyone is wondering where Aldous Huxley got his ideas for Brave New

World from, look no further.


Manspreading for Lebensraum, Part 2

Moving Out

by Alex Fontana


“We must work superficially and in large groups, altering the conditions of life and improving the rules of the game.” — Louis Wirth

Integration — the attempt to place large numbers of Blacks in White living space — is typically and naively seen as an issue that just concerned Blacks and Whites, but the dirty little secret of integration is that it was mainly about Jews.

Like ‘racism’ and ‘anti-Semitism’ the word ‘integration’ shares similar origins as a code word for obscuring the reality of ethnic warfare. All these terms were popularized through academia and the media, two areas where Jewish influence has predominated. It is well known that “racism” was first popularized by the Jewish communist, Leon Trotsky. The key moment came when he was writing his History of the Russian Revolution (1930) and reacted to a comment he picked up in the writings of Karl Marx:

“In the same way the Teutonic jackasses blamed the despotism of Frederick the Second upon the French, as though backward slaves were not always in need of civilized slaves to train them.” This brief comment completely finishes off not only the old philosophy of the Slavophiles, but also the latest revelations of the ‘Racists.’ (History of the Russian Revolution)

Both Marx and Trotsky were Jewish racists, faced with the Jewish problem in a much more intense form than Jews face it today. This is the problem of asserting ethnic interests and entering into ethnic conflicts when the perception of such behaviour by other groups raises the danger of mobilizing overwhelming forces against them. The solution to the Jewish problem usually involves an interesting degree of subterfuge. For example, Marx and Trotsky despised their host nations but transformed their Jewish resentment into an assertion of the inferiority of all those who rejected the ‘vision’ of these progressives, in touch with the inviolable grand historical forces and universal verities.

In a similar vein, ‘integration’ — a supposedly ‘positive’ idea about uplifting Blacks by integrating them into White America — was actually about destroying certain ethnic groups and undermining the dominance of the White race, in order to make society safer for the Jews. Both ‘racism’ and ‘integration,’ therefore, are revealed as code words for cloaking a specific type of domination and social engineering by Jewish progressives.

For What it’s Wirth

Much of the intellectual weaponry behind the policy of integration and the attack on the communities of White ethnics in the 20th century can be attributed to the work of Louis Wirth (1897-1952), a Jewish sociologist and member of the Chicago School of urban sociology. He was a devoted Marxist and Communist supporter in his youth, who channeled his ethnic interests through the class politics of his time. At university, just like Trotsky and Robert Moses, the Jewish urban planner who enacted the destruction of New York’s traditional neighbourhoods, Wirth framed the issue in class terms rather than ethnic one, but in a way that served and shielded his ethnic interests:

“In the United States, membership in the ‘middle class’ would serve the same purpose that absorption into the proletariat would serve in the Soviet Union.”
(E.M. Jones: The Slaughter of Cities: Urban Renewal As Ethnic Cleansing, p.106)

Wirth represented the next generation of ‘psychological warriors’ after Lippmann, those who would socially engineer not only American attitudes, opinions, and modes of behavior, but also alter their very environments, by promoting and overseeing the ‘integration’ of their neighborhoods.

Louis Wirth
Louis Wirth

During the war Wirth worked for the OSS, the predecessor of the CIA, and the Office of War Information. He was involved in monitoring the dismantling of the America First Committee offices in Chicago and then monitoring ethnic newspapers in that city too.

The Chicago School, of which he was a member, was known for its idea of symbolic interactionism. This emphasized human behavior as determined by social structures and physical environmental factors, rather than genetic, cultural, or group characteristics. This meant, so they believed, that if you changed the environment you could change the man.

There are parallels between Wirth using the idea of ‘integration’ as a solution to the ‘Jewish problem’ and the positions that Trotsky adopted in the Russian Socialist Democratic Labor Party, one of the immediate precursors of the Communist Party:

“[Trotsky was] opposed to the separatist and nationalist program of the Russian Jewish Bund… these assimilationist socialists consciously conceptualized a post-revolutionary society in which Judaism would exist, but with a lessened social salience: ‘for them the ultimate solution of the Jewish problem would be an internationalist socialist society that paid no heed to distinctions between Jews and non-Jews… Similarly, after the revolution, ‘having abandoned their own origins and identity… the Jewish Bolsheviks found their ideological home in revolutionary universalism… the result was that the veneer of universalism covered up a continued separatism of radical Jewish intellectuals and political organizers.”
(Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements, p. 92)

Wirth, as we shall see, is the American equivalent to this strategy of solving the ‘minorities problem.’ In the Soviet Union, Stalin, after defeating the Trotskyists, managed to co-opt this intellectual strategy and implement it with characteristic ruthlessness. This manifested itself in the mass deportations of what were considered troublesome populations:

“In 1941 he deported the Volga Germans to Siberia, and in 1943 he deported the Kalmyks from their home just west of Astrakhan to Kazakstan.”
(The Slaughter of Cities, p.125)

Furthermore, in 1937 Soviet Koreans had been deported to Central Asia, and in 1944 the Chechen and Ingush peoples were displaced, as well as Balkars. Khrushchev pointed out: “The Ukrainians avoided meeting this fate only because there were too many of them.”

Breaking the link between blood and soil
Breaking the link between blood and soil

These ethnic displacements corresponded to the abolition of the semi-autonomous ethnic Soviet Republics and the rise of the Soviet Empire. The Soviet solution to the ‘minorities problem’ was to try to ‘integrate’ them into different parts of the empire.


Wirth attempted to apply this model to American society, making “urban renewal” a euphemism for ethnic cleansing and displacement. As the other pole in the bi-polar world that emerged after WWII, America too sought to internally transform itself into an internationalist empire through local integration efforts, all the better to project itself as a universal empire.

Leftists and academics like Walter Benn Michaels, who wrote The Trouble with Diversity: How We Learned to Love Identity and Ignore Inequality, claim that race obscures class warfare. The reality is actually the opposite: class warfare obscures racial warfare, seeking instead to redefine natural racial warfare in unnatural Marxist terms of class consciousness. This is the major contention of E.M. Jones’s The Slaughter of Cities, which is why it is so vital and dangerous. Jones makes the point that integration was actually the result of ethnic affiliations and prejudices, rather than the opposite.

A remnant of White ethnic America
A remnant of White ethnic America

According to Jones, integration was “part of an undeclared war on ethnicity.” Integrated housing in Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, New York, and other places meant the cooperation of liberal WASPs and Jews, who dominated boards, like the Metropolitan Housing and Planning Council (MPHC) and the Chicago Housing Association (CHA). When the Polish Roman Catholic Unionrequested that the Polish community be represented on the board of the MHPC, the MHPC simply replied that it did not “recognize national groups as such, but only individuals or groups having an interest in housing.”

As Jones comments, one would think that people whose neighborhoods were threatened with destruction would have a very real interest in housing. By the time White ethnics adopted the Marxist terminology of class to describe their plight, they had already lost the struggle because they were playing by the left’s rules:

“In effect, the class struggle of the ’30s was being superseded by the ethnic struggle of the ’50s, but it was still being portrayed in the political terms of a bygone era”
(The Slaughter of Cities, p.223)

While the First World War facilitated the centralization of the flow of information and the creation of a national culture under the aegis of what would become the psychological-warfare establishment, the Second World War created the conditions in which the Federal Government could socially engineer consent through WASP foundations, the psychological-warfare establishment, and urban planners.

The Federal Government viewed German-Americans and Italian-Americans, whose nations of origin were then at war with the USA, as potential fifth columnists in the war against fascism, but unlike the comparatively small population of Japanese-Americans — but just like the Ukrainians in the Soviet Union — they were simply too numerous to put into camps.

Wirth viewed these groups, as well as Polish-Americans and Irish-American, as those whose ethnic identity posed a threat to “American interests.” It is noticeable that what all the groups had in common was their Catholicism.

“The solution, in other words, to the threat ethnic communities posed was to break them up by inducing in them a desire to move up the economic ladder into the middle-class, where the organs of the dominant culture — public education, advertising, and the mass media — and not foreign language newspapers and customs associated with religion and family and country of origin determined the group’s norms”
(The Slaughter of Cities, p.223)

Jones points out that incentivizing ethnic Whites to move to the suburbs and become “white middle-class Americans” was just another form of social engineering aimed at breaking up ethnic enclaves and assimilate these ethnics into the suburban culture in which the television and the automobile would come to shape their lives and beliefs.

Suburbia: 'Auschwitz' for White ethnic America
Suburbia: ‘Auschwitz’ for White ethnic America

Louis Wirth and his Trotskyist assimilationist policy directed at ethnic enclaves, also found an echo in those liberal progressive Jews who yearned to rid themselves of their own despised historical identity. The catch-22 is that Jews are also subject to that same force of deracination as David Mamet, the Hollywood screenwriter, commented, describing what happens when Jews abandon their loyalty to their religion and tradition:

“It is the sin of the spies, a coward generation with a lack of belief in God. People have a drive to worship something, and will fill the void left by rejecting God by worshipping sports, celebrities, wealth, fame, state, sex, physical fitness, good works, human perfectibility.”

While Soviet Communists advanced collective universalism under the banner of comrades and workers, American liberal-democrat Jews like Wirth advanced it as an individualized condition under the formal legality of citizen. Each strategy undermined group affiliations, ridding the individual members of their historical baggage, and universalizing society into a state that ultimately benefited a certain kind of Jewish upward mobility.

According to Jones, it is also telling that the White ethnics effected by this strategy were mainly Catholic, as Catholicism was a definite obstacle to Jewish Marxist and Crypto-Marxist strategies.

“Wirth’s view was much closer to [Wilhelm] Reich’s sense that the Catholic Church was the main competitor to Marxism for the mind of modern man, primarily because both systems were more all-encompassing than the essentially laissez-faire English ideology”
(The Slaughter of Cities, p.105)

Paul Blandshard, the liberal protestant minister who wrote the anti-Catholic bestseller, American Freedom and Catholic Power, wrote that “the capacity to defend American democracy against a communist dictatorship must be based upon a free culture,” rather than the ‘authoritarianism’ of Catholicism. This liberal ‘free culture,’ however, seems to offer little by way of spiritual or social nourishment for a community; instead fixating on pleasure, abstract intellectualism, and a belief in technology.

WASP preppies on the rampage
WASP preppies on the rampage

Anglos supported the idea of laissez-faire ‘free culture’ because at the time it meant that they could dominate and manipulate the ethnics, while condescendingly enforcing upon them their liberal ideologies. It did not concern them overmuch that they permitted a few Jews to enter their ranks as lackeys and fellow manipulators, because the Jews simply did not have the numbers of the Catholics to constitute a threat to WASP domination.

Those Jews participating in this process and wishing to be emancipated from their own ethnic identity and to be conceived of as “individuals” or “comrades,” rather than as Jews, were quite prepared to destroy the culture and identity of others to achieve this leveling process. Wirth was no exception. Karl Marx commented on this type in On the Jewish Question (1844):

“By its very nature the Christian state is incapable of emancipating the Jew; but, adds Bauer, by his very nature the Jew cannot be emancipated. So long as the state is Christian and the Jew is Jewish, the one is as incapable of granting emancipation as the other is of receiving it.”

Marx and Trotsky found the solution to the Jewish problem in rejecting their own Jewish identity in order to enable them to transform the identity of the Christian “Other” by radically changing Christian society: “We must emancipate ourselves before we can emancipate others.”

This messianic tendency to be the liberator of others — to free the ignorant Goyim from their mental and political impoverishment — is a particularly Jewish characteristic, but one that is also self-serving in so far as it accomplishes the task of political emancipation for the Jews as Marx makes clear:

“The most rigid form of the opposition between the Jew and the Christian is the religious opposition. How is an opposition resolved? By making it impossible. How is religious opposition made impossible? By abolishing religion.”
(On the Jewish Question)

Thus when La Civilta Cattolica published their thesis on The Jewish Question in Europe in 1890, it was rather easy to see where the Jesuits found the notion that the Jews were chiefly responsible for the liberal revolutions, and their belief that “Europe finds itself mired, and to a great extent no longer Christian, but Jewish or Judaizing.”


The plot of The Melting-Pot (1908), a play by Israel Zangwill, best illustrates this Jewish desire for individual liberation. The story tells of a Russian-Jewish immigrant who survives a pogrom and looks forward to a society free of ethnic divisions and hatred proclaiming:

“America is God’s Crucible, the great Melting-Pot where all the races of Europe are melting and reforming… Germans and Frenchmen, Irishmen and Englishmen, Jews and Russians — into the Crucible with you all! God is making the American.”

The writer of The Melting Pot
The writer of The Melting Pot

Zangwill, while championing melting pot assimilation for America, was a committed Zionist and hence a Jewish ethnonationist. Jewish doublethink and black/white thinking is part of a long history of hypocrisy. Louis Wirth, like Zangwill’s protagonist, married outside his own ethnic group, to an Anglo Baptist named Mary Bolton. This was a reflection of his dual nature, but a dual nature that hinged on a unitary purpose. Louis Wirth the assimilationist was also the same Louis Wirth who worked for the Anti-Defamation League and B’nai B’rith, and who would always, “stand up and be counted where there were questions that we were Jews.”

Wirth was either suffering from a form of cognitive dissonance or what Kevin MacDonald calls self-deception as a mechanism for Jewish continuity via crypsis or semi-crypsis. Wirth’s solution of his own Jewish problem mirrors the experience of the traditional Jewish Ghetto, which was the subject of his graduating thesis:

Step one: The Jews insulate themselves in their ghettoes and built up massive reserves of wealth and in-group cohesion.

Step two: During the Haskalah (Jewish enlightenment), they spring forth into society as cosmopolitan members of the wider community, thereby changing the values of those communities to reflect a civic form of nationalism in which they could not only participate but dominate. While outwardly expressing “democratic” or “communist” principles they nevertheless inwardly pursue specific Jewish interests — “dress British, think Yiddish,” in other words.

The cosmopolitan aspect of this solution, involving the fragmentation of ethnic enclaves and ‘integration,’ is rife with problems for those subjected to it, including the “substitution of secondary for primary contacts, the weakening of bonds of kinship, the declining social significance of the family, the disappearance of neighborhood and the undermining of traditional basis of social solidarity.” (Abeje Berhanu: The Rural-Urban Nexus in Migration and Livelihoods Diversification, p.58.)

Wirth, predicted that within the new cosmopolitan rationalized order, the impersonal corporation would come to dominate:

“The advantage that the corporation has over the individual entrepreneur and the partnership in the urban-industrial world derives not only from the possibility it affords of centralizing resources of thousands of individuals or from the legal privilege of limited liability and perpetual succession, but from the fact that the corporation has no soul.”

This is essentially the endgame of destroying folk society and replacing it with a one-size-fits-all society of Hobbes “the war of all against all” overseen by exploitative corporations.

Wirth’s solution mirrors his own group’s experience of the Jewish Ghetto, and his recognition that the ghetto was dangerous to the Jews because it fostered “suspicions about the civic and national loyalty of the Jews.” His graduate thesis in sociology evolved into a 1928 book called The Ghetto (Studies in Ethnicity), which described the Jewish ghetto in Europe and America.

The ghetto reinforced ideas of dual civic or nationalist loyalties, as well as fears of an international Jewish community that was threatening the world. Jewish cosmopolitanism, political emancipation, and integration was designed to dispel these notions. Temporary segregation of ethnic groups on a separate but equal basis would be replaced with top-down, regulated, intergroup contact in order to facilitate trait-sharing and ‘cosmopolitanization.’

When Nazism became powerful in the 1930s, Wirth was appalled by the rise of the ‘myth of race.’ Influenced by Karl Mannheim’s Ideology And Utopia, he concluded that ‘integration’ would not happen naturally, and that cultural-group pluralism had created conditions which would lead to clashes and the annihilation of certain groups. Mannheim believed that intellectuals, because of their rationalized detachment, could undermine these forces and foster integration.

To nullify the threat of group pluralism Wirth decided to support a new social dynamic of individual pluralism of choice, in which cultures were accretions of individual tastes, not expressive of cultural and ethnic groups. As a corollary of this, he also advocated world government, cryptically stating:

“We must work superficially and in large groups, altering the conditions of life and improving the rules of the game.”

This phrase is essentially code for replacing the rooted community with the shallow and malleable individual through ‘improving’ or more accurately degrading society’s values by creating atomized individuals who could be controlled by public opinion and a mass cultural machine.


A great example of these machinations in action is provided by the recent HBO miniseries Show Me a Hero, which both looks back to an attack on White ethnic communities in Yonkers, a city to the north of New York City in Westchester County, and forward to future waves of Section 8 invasion. The TV series is based on a book by the New York Times writer Lisa Belkin that tells the story of enforced integration in Yonkers between 1987 and 1994. Here we see the strategies born out of the ghetto experience and gestated in the minds of Marx, Trotsky, and Wirth applied to modern (and future) America.

Like her Jewish precursors, Belkin seeks to frame the issue of integration in terms of a progressive Jewish solution to the Jewish problem, while fully retaining her Jewishness. When asked about the overtly Jewish role in integration, Belkin neither denies nor downplays the Jewish role. Instead she invokes the Jewish religious principle of Tiklun Olam, a Hebrew phrase meaning “repairing the world.” Tiklun Olam, was described by Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch in terms of a Kehilla (community) of Jews in galut (diaspora) successfully influencing their non-Jewish neighbors.

By her own admission, Belkin views integration as a Jewish social engineering strategy designed to make us Goyim better neighbors — thanks Jews! This element of Jewish imposition on non-Jews is reiterated by the details of the actual case and its cultural presentation as a template for further corrosion of White spaces.

Jewish actor Jon Bernthal as NAACP lawyer Michael Sussman
Jewish actor Jon Bernthal as NAACP lawyer Michael Sussman

In the actual case, the U.S. district judge who ruled against the city of Yonkers and who issued fines to bankrupt the city was a Jew. The architect and urban planner who oversaw the planning and construction of the first 200 affordable housing units for Blacks in White middle-class neighborhoods, followed by an additional 800, was Oscar Newman, another Jew. The lawyer who represented the NAACP against the city of Yonkers and who also served as assistant general counsel to the national office was Michael Sussman — yes, a Jew. The Secretary of the State of New York, who enforced Judge Sand’s ruling, Gail S. Shaffer, was…wait for it…also Jewish. I don’t see a pattern, do you? Nothing to see here. Kindly move on…

As for the TV show: the main writer and executive producer is David Simon and the CEO of HBO Richard Plepler. Both are, yes, you guessed it, Jews.

The presence of so many Jews working to “ethnically enrich” the White Catholic neighborhoods of Yonkers is mockingly admitted in Episode 2. The NAACP lawyer Michael Sussman (played by Jon Bernthal) cynically makes fun of the locals protesting against the social engineering of their neighborhoods. Sussman chides them, “Be courageous, stand up to those Blacks, those Jew lawyers, goddamn liberal judges.” Later when a character tells Judge Sand in Sussman’s presence that the housing is being perceived as “anti-Catholic” Sussman sneers, “Another Hebrew plot exposed!” Indeed.


Of PIGS and Men: A Review of Michael Novak’s Unmeltable Ethnics

“Industrialists like Henry Ford were bitterly anti-union and made a practice of playing one ethnic group against the other in keeping the workers under control and wages low. One of the groups which Ford favored the most was southern Blacks…”
                                              – E Michael Jones, The Slaughter of Cities, 43.
Michael Novak’s Unmeltable Ethnics (1996) is indispensible reading for the AltRight, specifically focusing on the ethnic experiences of southern and eastern Europeans, who will find exceptional resonance and relevance. But it should also be mandatory reading for WASPs, as they are the favorite target of Novak’s pen and often times justifiably so. Novak sees a WASP tendency to externalize faults, the world is impure outside of themselves and though much of Novak’s criticism may come from angles and perspectives that seem a little distorted, they are on the whole worth it. Unmeltable, is the second edition, the first was optimistically titled The Rise of the Unmeltable Ethnics (1972), the change in the book’s name perhaps corresponds to a change in the author’s perceptions and political aspirations. The new edition runs a little long at over 450 pages with added chapters amended from follow up essays for academic journals filling out the final four chapters. In Novak’s own words in the introduction to the ‘transaction’ edition:
“The publication of this book in 1972 marked my own declaration of independence from the cultural Left, at the time the preeminent force watching over what could be said and what couldn’t in American culture. As readers will see firsthand in this new edition (which leaves unchanged most of the original text), I was still writing as a man of the Left, certainly a man of the anti-capitalist Left. But I was, in truth, departing from leftwing orthodoxy in singling out cultural issues, rather than economic issues, as the primary neuralgic point in American (and not only American) life. I was defending – no, calling into political and cultural self-consciousness, and trying to inspire – those whom the elites liked to picture as paunchy fascists in undershirts, bigoted and unwashed. I was repelled by ‘the bigotry of intellectuals’ and the unworthy prejudices of the cultural Left. At the time celebrating the ‘liberation’ of the swinging singles, I thought intellectuals ought to be stressing the importance of family, even the psychological differences between ‘family people’ and those who find the unencumbered self a more fundamental reality. They ought to admire the latent strengths of traditional values and ethnic neighborhoods… To say the least, these ideas were premature. At the time, they were regarded as reactionary. They were said to be – the insult our elites hurl when they are being unmasked – ‘spreading hate.’”
The critics tend to misjudge the work from their own liberal pretensions, as one put it, “‘A Pole who knows he is a Pole, who is proud of being a Pole, who knows the social cost of being a Polish worker in American, who knows he stands in power, status and integrity – such a Pole can face a black militant eye to eye.’ Such writing, regardless of its literary power, regardless of whether or not it accurately depicts the feelings of a South Chicago steelworker – leaves me cold. Perhaps it brings back too many bad memories of Cicero, Marquette Park and Trumbull Park.” What they completely miss is that it is precisely Novak’s intention to redress Cicero, to return to it and provide the missing and obfuscated narrative of white ethnics themselves – “If you are the descendant of southern and eastern Europeans, everyone else has defined your existence. A pattern of ‘Americanization’ laid out.” E Michael Jones, has done the best work to date unmasking liberal pretensions and revealing integration as a way for elites to destroy white ethnic, largely Catholic communities, and political power. “The melting pot… may have been a rationale for deculturizing immigrants, depriving them of their cultural values and strength, and thus reducing their political and economic power. If one deprives people of their affective bonds to family, culture, and value, then one can reconstruct them afresh.”  Jones points out for example, the Racial Imbalance Act of 1965 “defined racial imbalance as schools having student bodies which were more than 50 percent black, a stroke which eliminated the need for racial redress in every suburban community in the state.”  Meaning that integration of blacks into ‘white schools’ meant largely only into urban ethnic schools, while WASPs and Jews pushed and laughed from their suburban incubations.
Novak sees the immense injustice of such policies, but unlike Jones is unable to conceive of a conspiracy or give proper voice beyond pretensions of injustice; Novak’s solution is for a black-Jewish-ethnic coalition to replace the black-Jewish-liberal-WASP one. In part this is because of a less rigorous collection of resources and texts, thus Novak’s solutions reek of liberalism, “If there is to be bussing of children in such circumstances, ethnic whites should be promised equal gains with blacks: equal opportunity for an experience in the better, more advanced suburban schools.”  Rather than outright disavowing such social engineering, Novak seeks to egalitarianize it.
Novak similarly identities specific insistences and techniques in the weaponization of the negro, “Many ethnics in particular do not object to school integration unless the ration of whites to blacks falls below 60 to 40. If it does, they claim, quality and services deteriorate.” – A very liberal estimate of the Peak Negro phenomenon.
“It is in their interest as an ethnic group to insist on high quotas for blacks in schools and jobs, and not to accept as valid the argument that equality is only for those who ‘qualify.’… hence blacks have seen fit to ‘change the rules’… They know that whites will not commit genocide – that is their ace. But whites do wish the race problem would ‘go away’; and that is a fantasy of genocide. It is a deeply buried fantasy precisely because it is too awful, difficult, and normally impossible to contemplate. Rather than face such fantasies, whites will pay a ransom. Still, whites both hate themselves for giving in and feel guilty for their fantasies. So the taunt of genocide intensifies their desire to be generous.”
Herein Mau-mauing, white guilt and ethno masochism are given adept psychological examination and expression. However Novak justifies ethnic resentment he cannot seem to condone political violence, in part because he knows that such use of violence will be, as it has been, used as a red herring to cover liberal WASP and Jewish machinations and thereby justify them.
“Special treatment and open enrollment and quotas are designed only for certain segments of the population. Among those most upset are ‘white ethnics.’ Their spokesmen argue that in the old days meritocratic principles were what they accepted as the measuring rods of success. Each person had to make it on his own… Black Power Movement…. In addition to the general reaction -anger and fear heaped upon ignorance and, in some instances, blatant anti-Negro sentiment… was astonishment at capitulations being made to demands for group rights rather than for greater access to individual opportunities. A sense of righteous indignation was apparent, especially since, as many argued, they were loyal, decent, hardworking, God-fearing Americans who never had anything to do with slaving but were being forced to pay for the sins of other peoples’ fathers.”
Despite his shortcoming Novak gives voice to white ethnics, who “do not like all that has happened to America these last fifty years. They look at it, not as a genuine expression of America, but as a betrayal.”
Novak writing the second edition more than two decades after the publication of the first, disavows the “new beast called ‘multiculturalism’”  despite being credited for paternity. Novak briefly challenges radical feminists, gay activists and environmentalists, as metaphysically “returning to gnostic worldviews” before God. Indeed Novak is a Catholic, and most of his extensive literary output is put in the service of Church themes, in this Unmeltable is rather unique. One of the problems and perhaps the principle contention of the book, is that ‘white ethnics’ were historically discriminated and taken advantage of from above by Nordics, and liberal Jewish intellectuals on the one hand, and are now excluded from considerations of historical remunerations from below historically blacks but now by all nonwhites (in whatever form – affirmative action, employment equity, media attention). “Two forms of prejudice stamped the immigrants. Both had a peculiar ‘northern’ quality: one was racial, the other ‘progressive.’ According to one view, it was his race and religion that made the southern European inferior. According to the other, it was his social and political backwardness.”  Novak further points to political maneuvering in this system of ethnic betrayal and dispossession, “Just as they were excluded before the early 1970s, the ethnics from Southern and Eastern Europe are again today given no place in curricula about ‘diversity.’ Ethnicity doesn’t seem to matter, only race, sexual preference, and gender. Intolerance is the new agenda. It never occurs to the ‘new multiculturalists’ that ethnic differences among Europeans alone… are full of passionate power, and heavy with political significance. All this lies beyond their own narrow, politicized agenda.”  Novak lists “nine perversions of ‘multiculturalism’” all of which could have come from an AltRight perspective. Without going into each of them: Anti-Americanism, victimology, ego-boosting, evasion, tactical relativism, censorship, groupthink, egalityranny and double standards. In this Novak identifies what is called cultural Marxism, “Multiculturalism tends to divide the world into a privileged set of victims and their alleged oppressors, through the lens of a loose and vulgar Marxism. This Marxism is cultural rather than economic…. It further pretends that its privileged groups are innocent.”
On immigration Novak recognizes that massive increases in 1970s and 1980s and that “most of these new immigrants were nonwhite” and he also recognizes that “They succeeded perhaps, even more quickly often in one generation.” This recalled a corporate meeting I was once compelled to attend working as a deracinated cog in a MNC in which a Vietnamese woman, who was a superior in another department, told us of her mother’s and other nonwhites immigrants struggles to get parity with Canadians – according to her it takes about 15 years, this was said without the slightly hint of irony. Novak also seems to miss the radical implications, he acknowledges that those “who migrated from entrepreneurial or market cultures” (Koreans, Chinese, West Indians and Middle Easterners) tended to adapt much better than those who came from peasant cultures (southern and eastern Europeans), the major problem Novak and the Vietnamese woman both miss is the radical change in the nature of the work these immigrants who expected to perform. For the older Europeans it was immigration into a subservient and well defined field, which is immigration for a specific purpose in poorly paid hard labour wherein they had to fight collectively for better wages and unionization. While for the new nonwhite immigrants it is preferential treatment in white collar and service industry and often well-paying jobs in an infrastructure built largely on the sweat and blood of those PIGS – PIGS being Novak’s acronym for Polish, Italians, Greeks and Slavs. This double-betrayal is not approached but I have felt and known it my whole life. “When the immigrants from southern and eastern Europe arrived in America industry was unregulated and capitalism was cruel.”
“They were, in a word, “peasants”-looked down upon not only by WASPs, who saw them as socially, religiously, and, yes, racially inferior, but intellectuals (of varying backgrounds themselves), who saw them as unwashed, uneducated, and uncouth, as culturally inferior.”  Novak also misses the radical changes involved in the growth of the service industry and the decline of manufacturing and a goods-producing economy, which should be the subject of another investigation.
As one reviewer put it, “There is little of empirical evidence in this book, little of historical proof. The book’s validity is simply that upon reading comment after comment (frequently funny, often pathos) the reader realizes the truth of Novak’s position.”
Novak’s primary focus is the big cities in the northeast; rarely does he discuss poor Appalachian WASPs or Midwestern ranchers, etc. On issues of immigration and elsewhere Novak is woefully liberal and often understudied. Hinting at a possible reason for this radical demographic shift that forecasts “a third world ethnic and racial composition for our future population” but never delving deep enough to criticize or understand, only in fact offering pathetically inept metaphors for getting along better, “symphony” rather than “melting pot.” In this and in his later radical shift towards cuckservatism (market liberalism), The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism, Novak betrays his own ‘constituency,’ for lack of a better term. He oddly confuses socialism with communism and the Soviet Union, something I cannot imagine an intellectual mistaking unless deliberately. However there are precious and insightful gems buried in Unmeltable Ethnics, which make it well worth it. Finally Novak admits that he may have been too hard on WASPs, perhaps somewhat identifying with whiteness and pan-European identity? Writing, “If I had had the faintest notion of how weak the WASP establishment actually was I think I would have rushed to shore up their resolve.”  Is Novak proposing a secular ecumenism along racial lines? In fact Novak’s initial publication has been heavily criticized, as a “WASP-baiting… hatchet job,”  and perhaps there is some validity to such objections.
In the new intro Novak writes some kind remarks on British institutional traditions even on English manners. He points to the wrongness of his prediction of a rising ethnic Democratic Party and coalition with blacks, “the growing alientation of liberal elites from the masses of liberal voters… only Jews (mostly) remain comfortably democratic.”  Novak believed that the 70s would be the time for a formation of ethnic power bloc and consciousness, however the revolution he thought would occur never formulated and instead the ethnics took on ‘white identity’ and ‘class identity’ as their markers. David A. Hollinger’s notion of the “ethnoracial pentagon” or “quintuple melting pot,” of European Americans, African Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Native Americans, more accurately describes the present reality of identity and politics, than Ruby Jo Reeves Kennedy’s 1944 “triple melting pot” theory, Hollinger refers to this as “Postethnic America.”
This corresponds to all the early notions of “the melting pot,” which either implicitly or explicitly referred to a fusion of European people (“white people”) to form the American citizenry – on loose hierarchic grounds reflected in immigration preferences. The fragmentation of the American ideal built on ethnocentric assimilation into the ‘ethnoracial pentagon’ is a perversion of the original intention of the Anglosphere (‘White Australia’) ideal, exacerbated by the weaponization of black resentment, the incursion of white guilt and the systematic changes to the immigration and cultural policies of Western countries brought about largely by Leftist elites. Because of the demonization of all Europeans, the ethnocracial pentagon model is conceptually outweighed by the polarization of a dichotomy Whites vs. Others as a social model – this is confirmed by official policy of the minority statuses of other groups (with white women included as historically disadvantaged as Others). All European males are conflated into the White categorization regardless of nuance and all non-European people are conflated into the status of ‘visible minority’ – this creates a tension and dichotomy which can only strengthen both the in-group feeling of European males systematically discriminated by policies of affirmative action, and the in-group feeling of Others, those heterogeneous members of the privileged minority groups. Liberals then seem astonished to discover white males collectively forming a voting bloc, because even though they are being systematically dispossessed and discriminated against, in the countries they built no less, that would be racist, and racism is evil, expect when its Leftist racism directed against white men. Leftist then simultaneously ignore the political bias of the “privileged minorities” – as in this article titled: “Trump’s support base pits white males against the rest of America” – the growth of a ‘white male base’ of the Republican Party is wrongfully blamed on ‘racists’ when in fact cultural Marxist policies have marginalized white males and created divisive politics in which for whites to stand up for their own group interests, something every other group is encouraged to do is deemed racist!
Novak writing in the 1970s has not yet seen the waves of immigration that would inflate the Other category and this massive injustice – the model he is working under is a tripartite hierarchy of liberal WASPs and Jews, Ethnics and Blacks.
In other areas Novak comes off as more liberal than he would like to imagine himself to be, in unsympathetically ascribing Mayor Frank Rizzo as a backlash politician who was thwarted by “The Project in Group Pluralism sponsored by the American-Jewish Committee, ably led by Irving Levine… as did the National Center for Urban Affairs led by Monsignor Geno Baroni,” these are the exact same groups that E Michael Jones points to as destroying the white ethnic neighborhoods with integration and urban renewal. Furthermore Novak’s treatment of Frank Rizzo is typically leftist partisan; in their view Rizzo “terrorized civil rights activists”  not that blacks supported by liberal Jews and WASPs were terrorizing, using black criminal gangs, their ethnic communities, hence from an essay on Rizzo:
“Whether we say ‘Italian’ or ‘Irish’ is not important, and yet we know we are talking about roughly the same people… the people are the same, and the issues are the same: their feelings that they have been ignored, have received little from government in recent years, and have borne the brunt of the costs involved in the economic and political rise of the Negroes.”
In effect “these feelings” are objective facts, but never let those get in the way of a good progressive story. The rise of Rizzo was in fact more legitimate than the marching of Martian Luther King jr and the demands for integration from blacks, Jews and liberal WASPs. Novak summarized it when he wrote: “There are, at present, no social rewards for integration, only penalties… but their persistent question is why the gains of blacks should be at their expense.”  To the WASP limousine liberal, or the Jewish intellectual, ethnic perception of reality is subject to subjectification and emotional error – and is generally always ‘bigoted.’ “They also resent the actual, daily contacts of their own culture with black culture. No amount of good will, theory or ideology blinds them to the actual experience.”
The most fundamental difference between PIGS and WASPs for Novak, a point tautologically expressed, is that ethnics are communal peoples, while Nordics are individualists. Novak is not a genetic determinist, but rather a cultural-historical one. “The Anglo-Saxon cult of the individual” is rather a result of protestant culture, Enlightenment thinking and the industrial revolution than genetics. At times the book is a series of observations, pithy points, and ranting, no rant more perspicacious than:
“’The poorer strata everywhere’… ‘are more liberal or leftist on economic issues…’ ‘But when liberalism is defined in non-economic terms – as support of civil liberties, internationalism, etc. – the correlation is reversed. The more well-to-do are more liberal, the poorer are more intolerant…’ why is it not open to persons of the poorer strata to assert that it is ‘extremist’ and ‘radical’ for privileged, educated persons to pursue their own interests and to solidify their own power by neglecting the fundamental economic needs of the poor and concerning themselves with luxuries like civil liberties and internationalism?
The basic interests of privileged, educated persons in a technological society lie on the side of superculture. A rationalized social order will function more efficiently if attitudes are universalized and if local pockets of tradition, ‘prejudice,’ and ignorance are made to give way to atomistic conceptions of self, society, and happiness. The pressures for civil rights are not simply moral; they are largely technological and economic.”
Novak gets a lot right, and by taking so many chances, gets some wrong, however what is beyond dispute is the insightful and thought-provoking quality of the work, with this in mind, I imagine categorically sharing quotes to be beneficial.
(By WASPs, Novak means educated liberal Protestant establishment of the northeast.)
“They take their own power, status, and sense of reality for granted, as no others in America can.”
“WASPs have been reduced to equality with other ethnic groups.”
“Not all WASPs are alike.”
“Their strong moral sense and their vulnerability to guilt feelings.”
“Irrepressible condescension.”
“Pilgrim’s progress never ends.”
“A sense of moral superiority is signaled in a thousand ways.”
“It is possible that Anglo-Saxon political creativity is exhausted.”
“Specialization, objectivity and technical proficiency, is notoriously sterile for the emotions, the instincts, the imagination. The rebellion of the elite youth against ‘corporate liberalism’ was in large measure a revolt in the name of instinct.”
“The body is more or less a machine.”
“Old America believes pain is useless.”
“Whereas the Anglo-Saxon model appears to be a system of atomic individuals and high mobility, our model has tended to stress communities of our own, attachment to family and relatives, stability and roots.”
“The reduction of metaphysics to a single test: success.”
“Much more than Catholics, Protestants emphasized the ascetical value of works. But the actual operation of the American system was a boondoggle of favors from government to ‘captains of industry…’ America was socialism for the entrepreneurial classes, capitalism for the rest.” (116).
“Seek your own interest and help humanity in the bargain. Grace has seldom come so cheap.”
“What Anglo-Saxons mean by religion is control, propriety, conscience, order, mastery – all their symbols run in the patterns of dominating reason.”
“Both puritans and partisans of sexual liberation seem to see their essential task as the expansion of Reason.”
“Far too strong was the overriding Anglo-Saxon imperative to ‘civilize’ and ‘subdue’ the continent – as a mirror of course, of his own self-mastery.”
“By disdain for more lustful and relaxed races, he vindicated his fidelity to purer ideals than others were able even to imagine.”
“Stephen Thernstrom opened my eyes to the poverty and degradation exercised by upper-class WASPS for lower-class WASPS. He helped me to see more vividly how threatening to poor WASPS cheap immigrant labor must have been.”
“English conceptions of order, decorum, social planning, the free marketplace (of goods and ideas), friction-free consensus, etc., dominate American life so thoroughly that most WASPS seem unaware of them as ethnic preferences.”
“What used to be regarded as dignified reserve is now mocked as uptightness.”
“Who wants to be WASP? Not even WASPS are certain.”
“…the pressures of Americanization – which was really WASPification.”
“Kevin Phillips argued in The Emerging Republican Majority… that ethnic Catholics who, in Phillips’ acid scheme, had come to hate Jews and Negroes more than they hated WASPS.”
“Protestantism is the culture religion of modernity.”
“…a synthesis of WASP individualism and corporate teamwork, with a new sensuous mobility to fill up free time purchased by technology.”
“An Anglo-Saxon elite dominated America until the emergence of a national culture…”
“The WASP and the utilitarian like to handle difficult political decisions politely; it is called ‘civility’ but it is in fact a device useful for keeping power within a small circle… ugly scenes and direct confrontations are not ‘civil’… people in power who fear the ‘dirty hands’ essential and always implicit in the exercise of power. The Anglo-Saxon conscience is out of tune with Anglo-Saxon behavior, and internally divided as well. That peculiar form of duplicity – too unconscious to be called hypocrisy – is despicable in American culture. Ethnics perceive it just as clearly as blacks do.”
“The heart of WASP culture is the property relation. Upon property, the most easily rationalized of relations, WASP notions of freedom are founded.”
“The central WASP words are having and controlling… no expression therein of the dark struggles of the whole human spirit.”
“Protestantism, Mailer thinks, ‘was never that concerned to capture the private parts of a man.’ It is, he thinks, ‘not so much a religion as a technique in the ordering of communities, able to accelerate the growth of the scientific spirit.”
“The WASP way of life had made brilliant contributions to world history, but it was also profoundly sick.”
“Mastery of environment, mastery of self, mastery is given highest priority. The organism of the self is whole, healthy, ration; its underside… seems to be ignored.”
“Decorum and self control.”
“The WASP way – the almost universal industrial way of the modern age – is to put a harsh rein upon the impulses of man’s animal nature, to place him in the halter of the industrial machine, and to order him docilely to produce… Its God is law, order, and industrious Reason. Against it, man’s human instinct, his very flesh rebel.”
“The unspoken premise of WASP culture is violence and madness at a distance.”
“No race has ever designed techniques more efficient for distancing itself from the effects of its own power.”
“WASP culture insists upon formality and reason in such a way that the non-WASP feels suffocated.”
“WASP culture channels private rage into public horror.”
“A society of Marlboro men and ‘liberated’ women (for Women’s Lib, too, is infected with WASP individualism and the WASP metaphor of domination, despite its appeals to sisterhood) is condemned to being a lonely crowd.”
“There is nothing that so infuriates me as the disguised aggression of a Quaker.”
“When troubles arise in Anglo-Saxon democracies, the imagination immediately leaps to the language of ‘social problems,’ ‘programs,’ ‘reconstruction,’ ‘priorities,’…  ‘People’ is an organic, nongeometric, nonrational, nonmechanical concept.”
“Built into the language of Anglo-Saxon social work… is a scheme of manipulation.”
“Protestant American myths of personal success and self-help required immigrants to change their conception of themselves, their families, and society.”
“Deciding not to continue trying to become what they are not, can never be.”
“The question is, Can ethnic Americans be persuaded to side with nativist Americans in an ‘emerging Republican majority”?
“In a psychologically confused state. They are unable to be WASPS; they have lost confidence in being themselves.”
“The Church in America… has become Protestant, individualistic, and pietist in character.”
“Italians have been symbolic villains in American imagination ever since the puppet shows that Huck Finn went to see.”
“The establishment of systems of identity and self-respect is as crucial for whites as for blacks.”
“Only one out of four high-school seniors (males) desires blue-collar work. But almost half of the jobs in our economy are blue –collar. Much frustration. About half of Irish, Polish, and Italian households are in blue-collar work.”
“The psychological cosmos of workingmen and their wives is different than that of our professional elites.”
“Their lives are not political or social so much as familial and centered in the neighborhood.”
“Pain is one of the most poignant occasions for community, sympathy, tears caresses.”
“Family and food – the two great Italian joys.”
“The Irish… have qualities that make men interesting rather than successful.”
An ethnic group “a group with historical memory, real or imaginary. One belongs to an ethnic group in part involuntarily, in part by choice.”
“Yet Polish feelings do not go easily into the idiom of happy America, the America of the Anglo-Saxons and yes, in the arts, the Jews.”
“What is a Catholic but what everybody else is in reaction against. Protestants reformed ‘the whore of Babyon.’”
“English Catholics have little of the sense of inferiority in which many other Catholic groups tend to share.”
“We have most ambivalent feelings about suburban assimilation and mobility.”
“It must be said that ethnics think they are better people than blacks. Smarter, tougher, harder working, stronger in their families.”
“By being made conscious of our olive skin, brawny backs, accents, names and cultural quirks not plain to us.”
“…’humanism’ or ‘progress,’ it seems to ethnics like moral pressure to abandon their own traditions, their faith, their associations, in order to reap higher rewards in the culture of national corporations.” (72)
“To ethnics, America is almost a religion… Many millions proved that they were men, not PIGS, by expressing a willingness to die beneath those colors.”
“The feeling for religion among Slavic and Italian peoples is almost totally different from the feeling of WASP or Irish Catholics: more pagan, more secular, closer to earth, aesthetic rather than moral, meditative rather than organizational.”
“But in general the Catholic soul finds it difficult to value success.”
“This ‘Catholic difference’ is valuable. It weighs against the myth of personal success both by its sense of communal interdependence and by its holistic sense of society. In its view, society is not a machine composed of individual atoms, but an organism giving life to families, and through them, to persons.” (119)
“There is an untamed wildness in the Irish breast, a rebellion against neatness and order, an underlying Celtic rage, flash, imagination.”
“…the sexual attitudes of ordinary people in Italy or Greece or the Slavic countries are amply suggested by the life of Tolstoi, by ‘Zorba the Greek,’ by Fellini’s films. For unmarried persons to make love is to violate something sacred, but in the name of something healthy, attractive and wholly expected. The violation of the sacred adds to the enjoyment. It is wrong to fornicate; but it is delicious… One does not expect human beings to be strong, masterful, iron-willed; one anticipates ‘human weakness.’” (125).
“How desperately many tried to prove they were proper, reliable, chaste, self-disciplined, controlled. How earnestly they worked against their instincts, impulses, gestures, feelings, drives, and perceptions. How urgently they worked to find sex ‘dirty.’ The melting pot was a cauldron of lead for the purging and the encasement of passion. If one could not be a WASP, one could make oneself into a good metallic soldier.”
“The ethnic American is accustomed to direct expressions of anger; direct violence seems to him an ineradicable part of human life.”
“The innocence of Johnny Carson’s face insults the night. Even serious literature scarcely reflects the brutality most of the immigrants endured.”
“But concerning the urban experience of immigration, it is as though our grandfathers did not live and did not count: as if they were only grains ground to tasteless, powdered meal. Consumed.”
“When he despairs of WASP rationality, a Catholic does not automatically unfurl the banner of irrationality.”
“The Catholic does not have the WASP qualms about handling power, does not feel the WASP’s need to hide the exercise of power and to distance himself from its effects. Catholics are tougher, more direct – ‘ruthless’ is, shall we say, the ethnic slur.”
“The human being is a social network, necessarily dependent and psychically interrelated, a social organism, a political animal. The self is not an ‘I’ but a ‘we.’”
“I prefer entanglement to distance.”
“The religion of southern and eastern Europeans is not, as it is for northern peoples, a matter of morality and ethnics. It is rather a way of feeling, an attitude, a sentiment… There is a pagan quality to the religion of southern and eastern Europe that I find beautiful… In the south and east, the split between secular and sacred has not been thoroughly established in the soul. To be lusty, natural, enchanted with the earth, in agony or in despair is to be religious: everything is within God’s presence, enveloped by him.”
“The value deepest in the psyche of southern and eastern Europeans (I say yet once again) is an instinct for family and community.”
“they consciously cherish (unlike many Jewish and WASP intellectuals) a cultural history antedating the Enlightenment.”
“There were only two aristocracies ready to receive the immigrants: city ‘machines’ and labor unions. These ‘aristocracies of the working man,’ moreover, were in large measure his own creation; they were seldom WASP in inspiration.”
“… the characteristically Catholic vice of extolling authority at the expense of liberty.”
“The white-black polarization is gross.”
“Martin Luther King came to Chicago as if its symbolic structure were the same as Alabama’s.”
“… the Negro represents the id of promiscuity, destruction and looseness.”
“Someone must make the argument in America, because it is true, that black militance can push some WASPS and some liberals around, but it will not push ethnics around.”
“The ethnics believe that they chose one route to moderate success in America; namely loyalty, hard work, family discipline, and gradual self-development. They tend to believe that some blacks… want to jump via revolutionary militance… over the heads of lower-class whites. Instead of forming a coalition of black and white lower classes, black militants seem to prefer coalition with white intellectual elites.”
“A relatively small number of Jews in New York and Los Angeles set a style for Jewishness that may be foreign to Jews in Cleveland or Utica.”
“The Jew represents the superego goals of ambition, money, and group loyalty.”
“The technique of the first wing of intellectuals has been to look upon ordinary Americans as backwards and unenlightened. The technique of the second wing has been to deliver a slap to the face of middlebrow America: the girl lifts her skirt and asks the cop, ‘This is what you want?’”
“The Jewish writer in particular, although not alone, set out to liberate the self-consciousness of Americans from WASP patterns of perception.”
“The most rigorous cultural standards in American life were maintained among the aliens by the family of New York intellectuals, almost all Jewish… they opened the way for ethnic pluralism.”
“The Anglo-Saxon imagination is radically individualistic; the imagination of most other cultures, not least the Jewish, is radically communal.”
“The single most liberating contributions given him has been made by Jewish writers. Almost without help from other ethnic groups, Jewish writers have broken the WASP hegemony over the American imagination and sensibility.”
“the Catholic, despite his social and political backwardness in several respects, is psychically more the brother of the Jew than of the Protestant. Both feel the weight of the WASP.”
“It is graphed that the Jewish experience is distinguished among all others in the West…”
“The Jew is seldom, if ever, a ‘self’ in the way an Anglo-Saxon is a self: atomic, alone, solitary.”
“For the time being, it will suffice to note the Jewish struggle against WASP consciousness.”
“I am the Raskolnikov of jerking off… One’s orgasm is the clue to how one is living.”
“Less than any other people have the Jews lived by property, or by production; more than others, by the arts of commerce and finance.”
“Like the Catholic, the Jew is not comfortable in conceiving of liberty in purely individualistic terms; to do so runs against the grain of his experience of life. More often than the Catholic, the Jew tries to imagine liberty without fully imagining the social and political institutions – with their inevitable authorities – that would enflesh it… Neither individualistic nor collectivist, it is in fact a sort of mirror image of the Jewish community through the ages: a people who without governmental or coercively structured economic institutions nourish in their midst strong persons, strong cultural selves.”
“The communal tradition of Jewish thought has ceded too much to WASP individualism.”
“The Jewish imagination, fortified by centuries of opposition to various penalizing and alien establishments, is anti-establishmentarian.”
“… the phrase ‘white racism’ has become for the Left what ‘communism’ was for Joe McCarthy: an indiscriminate scare word designed to prevent clear thought and apt strategy.”
“There are, at present, no social rewards for integration, only penalties.”
“By integration, intellectuals lose nothing, for them a moral gravy train.”
“But this particular class warfare finds the upper classes rhetorically on the side of revolution in values and structure, and the lower classes rhetorically on the side of stability, slower evolution, and loyalty.”
“No ‘enlightenment provides a purely rational, universal form. There is no such form.”
“To become professional is ordinarily to acquiescence in separation by no little gap from the people among whom one was born.”
“The professional classes describe themselves as a ‘constituency of conscience.’… They are the ‘human beings,’ others the barbarians.”
“The ‘constituency of conscience’ prides itself on its concern for the poor and oppressed in America and the Third World. But they do so in full knowledge that their own professional careers, economic security, neighborhoods, educational opportunities for their children, and summer homes are not going to be threatened.” (43).
“Behind the screen of universal values, the ‘constituency of conscience’ is far more coercive and self-interested than it cares to admit.” (45)
“Especially in America has the myth of homelessness been allowed to thrive, and a rootless class to grow.”
“The realism of ‘enlightenment’ creates a windswept vacuum in the soul, into which, finally, only naked power can rush.” (57)
“to be modern is decidedly not to be medieval; to be reasonable is not to be dogmatic; to be free is clearly not to live under ecclesiastical authority; to be sciencific is not to attend ancient rituals, cherish irrational symbols, indulge in mythic practices.”
“Liberal education tends to separate children from their parents, from their roots, from their history, in the cause of a universal and superior religion.”
“In love with change, the new social activist dreads apathy and inertia, is excited by ‘breakthroughs.’ He likes things that are ‘forward-loooking.’ ‘Liberation’ is his banner.”
“A new religion is implanted: power over others, enlightenment, an atomic (rather than communitarian) sensibility, a contempt for mystery, ritual, transcendence, soul, absurdity, and tragedy; and deep confidence in the possibilities of building a better world through scientific understanding.”
“Becoming modern, then, is a matter of learning to be solitary.”
“The mobile ones, the swinging atoms, the true practitioners of the new religion.”
“Bigness, largeness, impersonality, national patterns of thought, and national methods began to reward men of a different social type than those who had been rewarded earlier.”
“The warmth and security of a vanished organic community was an attractive image to set against the realities of the present – the factory, the immigrant, the reign of the market.”
“The most revolutionary force in American life for the past hundred years has been the nationalizing, standardizing superculture shaped by industry.”
“Those in America who call themselves conservative are the chief agents in the destruction of what they claim to value.”
“The world of television is inherently visual, rich, baroque, and Catholic; Protestant sensibility was doomed by the cathode rays.”
“anti-Catholicism is – or perhaps was – the anti-Semitism of the intellectuals.”
“traditional New England WASP intellectuals and Jewish intellectuals. It is the prejudice of the enlightened against the unenlightened.”
“The intellectual appears to be in reaction against the family. Almost every cause he espouses destroys the tissue of the family.”
“Good words like ‘honesty’ and ‘authenticity’ become lost in the libidinal jungles of competing desires.”
“The pursuit of individual authenticity is stupid if a human is not a private but a social animal, not primarily an individual but primarily a member of communities.”
“America is sick because her intellectual classes are also sick…”
“America lack an aristocracy and a ‘truly conservative’ respect for elite institutions.”
“What these writers call ‘enlightenment’ is an imposition of values and attitudes that may be less humane, less than humanly satisfying, less than worthy of concrete men and women.” (173).
“Feudal hierarchies look to the past; lower classes live in the present; the middle class invent the future.”
“Joy and delight come from acceptance of the finite. There is no freedom without the finite. There is no freedom without ‘repression.’”
“The planet could well use, perhaps, a thousand years of slowing down…”
“The chief transition in recent Western history has been a transition from the legitimation of choices made through aristocratic-monarchical elites to the legitimation of choices made through corporate, professional elites.”
“… democracy is an ideology and a procedure which appeal most to privileged and relatively leisured elites… ‘more than one road seems to suggest the elitist underpinnings of pluralist doctrine.’”
“Democracy is in actual practice and in a very wide range of matters extremely fatiguing, inefficient, and a vast nourisher of illusions… It is a quasi-religious ritual of the most superficial and degrading sort.”
“The more educated people are, the more they cherish enlightenment values – is almost a tautology.”
“For enlightened persons, of course, ‘tolerant’ is a highly charged moral word. It is a little like telling Irish clergymen that ‘Jewish intellectuals are not chaste,’ when one perhaps only wants to say that chastity does not rank high in the moral priorities of one group as compared to another with a different morality.”
“Why, above all, do objective and value-neutral social scientists allow themselves to use of others words they would not like applied to themselves? Working-class consciousness seems coherent, in some respects enviable, in some ways weak, but above all appropriate to the real conditions of working-class life. The interests of the working-class are not those of the educated and privileged class.”
“For democracy is not a system for resolving real differences, only a procedure for neutralizing or displacing them.”
“I dream of more people on the land, of policies that make life on farms socially and economically attractive.”
“The Sovietization of the world and the Americanization look too uncomfortably alike.”
“The effective ideology of the modern world is neither socialism nor capitalism, it is pragmatism.”
“… conventional wisdom is that class identifications are important, but not ethnic identifications.”
“Human beings are imagined as monadic parts of a great social machine. No wonder that’s the way they feel.”
“Professionalization is necessarily an abstraction; a person concentrates upon becoming good at a narrow sliver of life. Many interests are reduced to one. All energy goes into a single wavelength. Earsplitting distortion accumulates. Human beings become grotesque.”
“In America it is wiser for ethnic groups not to throw stones.”