by Andrew Hamilton
Deutsche Übersetzung hier
“Whiteness” no longer adequately defines who we are.
Jews present the biggest challenge to the naïve concept of whiteness. Most whites cannot distinguish Jews from members of their own race even when Jews explicitly emphasize their Jewishness.
Nevertheless, Jews and whites differ radically.
The physical differences are often obvious to people who know they exist and take the trouble to look for them.
But the primary difference between Jews and whites is psychological, and hence not visible to the naked eye.
Jews sometimes describe two radically different types of “souls”—an “animal” or “animalistic” soul possessed by Jews, non-Jews, and animals, and a higher, “godly” soul possessed only by Jews. This godly soul is so distinct that it renders Jews a superior “species” or “genus.” (The terms are completely unscientific, but it’s one way some of them conceptualize the racial gulf between themselves and us.) Jews may look externally like other men, but in reality their godly “souls” render them a different, superior, “species,” while non-Jews are mere beasts.
Different Jews would express the basic idea differently, or refrain from expressing it at all, but there is little doubt that it captures the fundamental ethnic view that throbs inside the noggins of most Jews.
In essence, I subscribe to it myself, except that I reject the overweening claim to superiority or goodness. Jews are the opposite of godly.
There is an overriding genetic component to Jewishness. More than religion, more than culture, it is genes that make Jews unique. But their distinctness expresses itself most sharply in behavioral, psychological, and emotional rather than physical (phenotype, including skin color) terms.
Jews are always conscious of this sharp disparity between themselves and others; whites, indeed all Gentiles, are typically clueless about it. Properly exploited, Jewish hyper-awareness and -sensitivity could be their Achilles heel.
Jews often strive to conceal their identity from non-Jews. Because of their physiological resemblance to whites, and whites’ congenital inability to perceive the radical uniqueness of Jews, they often pass as white.
But because Jews are not white, their genes should be excluded from the white gene pool, and as a group they should be prohibited from residence and citizenship in white polities, and membership in white organizations and movements.
As an aside, I must reject the argument, which has been made, that Nordic-looking Jews should, because of their appearance, be regarded as Nordics. The logical corollary would be that Mediterranean-looking Jews should be welcomed as southern Europeans, Slavic-looking Jews as Slavs, and so forth. This is incorrect, for Jewish racial uniqueness is not primarily phenotypic.
Germany’s Nuremberg Laws remain the lodestar on this question of line drawing between Jews and whites.
The two-fold approach of the laws was to (a) sharply distinguish between Jews and Aryans, forbidding sexual intercourse and reproduction between them and (b) exclude part-Jews (quarter- and half- Jews) from the Aryan category as “Mischlinge” (hybrids). (The SS employed a far more stringent standard: in order to join, a candidate had to prove genealogically that all direct ancestors born since 1750 were non-Jewish.)
These revolutionary laws had the effect of defining and stabilizing the Aryan gene pool and halting the massive gene flow into it that had formerly occurred. By arresting the one-way Jewish to Gentile gene flow, the laws set the people upon a healthy future course.
Perhaps the Nuremberg standards should apply to all non-whites.
An American Analogy
Recall that until the mid-20th century in the US, state laws and customs against miscegenation with blacks were similarly designed to safeguard the white gene pool once geographic isolation had ceased. They defined people as Negro if they had even a small fraction of black ancestry. Most state laws specified the fraction as one-fourth or one-eighth. Nonwhites included:
Mulattos (1/2): Persons with one white parent and one Negro parent (Barack Obama, Halle Berry).
Quadroons (1/4): Persons with one Negro and three white grandparents—the offspring of a mulatto and a white.
Octoroons (1/8): Persons with one Negro and seven white great-grandparents—the offspring of a white and a quadroon.
Quintroons (1/16): Persons with one Negro and fifteen white great-great-grandparents—the offspring of an octoroon and a white.
Wikipedia states that William Pierce’s novel of white revolution The Turner Diaries (1978; 2d ed. 1980) “makes mention of forced relocation for Quadroons and Octoroons after whites prevail in a race war against the government.”
American laws regarding blacks were thus more stringent (definitionally) than the Nuremberg (but not the SS) requirements for Aryan ancestry.
This is a salutary reason why, for a long time, white-black gene flow, though relatively infrequent, was from the white gene pool into the African American gene pool rather than the other way around. Until recently, African Americans averaged 25 percent white ancestry, while white Americans’ gene pool consisted of less than 1 percent African genes.
Anyway, my purpose here is to illustrate how, if the existence of socially irreconcilable racial, behavioral, psychological, cultural, and ethical variations between Jews and whites is accepted, it is readily apparent that “whiteness” in the sense of phenotype is inadequate as a racial differentiator. The proliferation of part-Jews further complicates the issue.
A few random examples follow. I’ve employed the Nuremberg standard to determine who’s white and who’s not. Thus, half- and quarter- Jews are labeled “nonwhite.”
Bernard Baruch was a full Jew. His father, a German (Ashkenazi) Jew, was a staff surgeon to General Robert E. Lee, and joined the Ku Klux Klan after the Civil War. In an online video clip from the 1930s, Baruch can be heard briefly alluding, with mild disparagement, to the Union forces that marched through the South.
His mother was Sephardic.
Below is an ad from a Jewish publication, not atypical, directed at Jewish audiences and seen almost exclusively by them. Such ads frequently employ models who look Aryan.
What are we to make of this attractive woman? Is she Jewish? We have no way of knowing based upon appearance.
White-looking models seem to turn up frequently in advertisements in exclusively Jewish publications whose white readership is either nonexistent or negligible.
Is this analogous to white actors cast as Jews in Hollywood films and TV shows, or are most of the white-looking models actually Jewish?
Do Jews somehow identify with Aryan-looking models and actors?
What goes through the minds of Jewish readers when they see ads such as this?
Rashida Jones and Peggy Lipton
I’m familiar with actress Rashida Jones from the TV show The Office (where she was cast as Italian-American “Karen Filippelli”). But she has also appeared on the television programs Boston Public and Parks and Recreation. She can pass as a Mediterranean white.
Yet her father is Negro musician and media mogul Quincy Jones, and her mother Peggy Lipton, the blonde actress from the 1970s TV show The Mod Squad. At Harvard Rashida was a member of the Black Students Association.
Peggy Lipton, despite being 100% Ashkenazic, easily passed as white—she looked Nordic.
Charlie Sheen and Brooke Mueller
Here’s an American family (the couple has since split) that gives every appearance of being white when judged according to unsophisticated criteria.
What do we have here?
Names are cultural cues. Actor Charlie Sheen’s real name is Carlos Estévez. Assuming we know this, in a North American context, it immediately suggests Mestizo ancestry. (If we don’t know it, physical appearance and other cultural cues do not steer us in that direction.)
In reality, Charlie Sheen’s father, actor Martin Sheen (Ramón Estévez), is half Spanish and half Irish. So, in Charlie’s case, one-quarter Mediterranean European ancestry is a factor, but not Mestizo blood.
Charlie Sheen’s mother’s background remains obscure. He has stated that she is Jewish, but it is unclear whether this is so. If she is Jewish or half-Jewish, for example, Sheen would be non-white according to the Nuremberg standard. But, since we don’t know, the guide of naïve whiteness (appearance) doesn’t assist us.
It’s ironic that Sheen, if he is nonwhite, is so because of Jewish rather than hybrid Amerindian ancestry. His physical appearance provides little guidance; my uninformed guess based solely upon his looks and real name would have been part-Mestizo.
Sheen’s attractive ex-wife, Brooke Mueller, is half-Jewish (via her mother). So Mueller is not white. The twin boys are at least one-quarter Jewish (through Brooke; possibly more through Charlie), so they are not white, either.
Thus, the photo depicts a majority non-white family. It is completely nonwhite if Sheen possesses the Jewish ancestry he claims to have.
You perhaps think Jews don’t pay attention to such matters?
The Jewish News Weekly, a publication of the San Francisco Jewish community, parsed the ancestry of Sheen and Brooke Mueller with the enthusiasm of a race purity office in the Third Reich. No doubt the ADL and many individual Jews did the same thing.
Wilders, a Dutch parliamentarian, is leader of the Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid, PVV), the third-largest political party in the Netherlands, which he founded in 2004.
His undeserved reputation as a white nationalist is the result of hysterical press coverage by the international media, combined with intensely emotional efforts of anti-white governments in Holland, Great Britain, and the United States to stifle his speech and activities.
The motivation for the hatred, which has placed Wilders’ life in jeopardy, is ostensibly his unyielding opposition to Islam and perceived sympathy for Dutch European culture.
Yet Wilders appears to have no genuine commitment to white racial interests whatsoever. He has shunned leaders like Jean-Marie Le Pen of France, Jörg Haider of Austria, and others he belittles as “right-wing fascists.”
Indeed, Wilders’ ethnic commitments are apparently limited to Jews and Israel. His adoration for the little gangster state is well-known. After high school he lived on a moshav (a cooperative agricultural community, not a kibbutz) and worked for Israeli firms. This important period of his life remains shrouded in shadows.
The fear and loathing directed at Wilders from so many powerful quarters throughout the diaspora, combined with his Zionist zealotry, links to Israel, and continued ability to function in Dutch politics despite charges of racism and anti-Islamism, invites speculation that “white racism” serves as a straw man in what is really a fierce, internecine struggle over Zionism currently being waged within world Jewry. It is not inconceivable that Wilders is an Israeli intelligence asset.
The ethnicity of Wilders’ second wife, a diplomat from Hungary named Krisztina Marfai, has been conflictingly reported as Jewish or Turkish. Either way, she is evidently nonwhite. Thus, Wilders’ children would also be nonwhite, if he has any by her.
A few years ago a Dutch news outlet reported that Wilders was a Dutch-Indonesian hybrid (an “Indo” of mixed European/native Indonesian ancestry). His maternal grandparents lived in Indonesia (the Dutch East Indies), a Dutch colony until 1949: “In June  a genealogist said he had found several Indonesian ancestors of the populist Dutch politician.” No further information about these alleged Indonesian ancestors was provided.
Instead, the article focused on an item from the Left-wing Dutch weekly De Groene Amsterdammer written by an anti-white anthropologist named Lizzy van Leeuwen, described as “an expert on the position of Indo-Dutch people in the post-colonial age.”
The only “Indonesian” ancestry cited in the English-language report on the article (I don’t have access to van Leeuwen’s Dutch original) was Jewish, not native Indo.
Wilders’ maternal grandmother, Johanna Ording-Meijer, came from “an old Jewish-Indonesian family”—a fact the politician “lied about in his 2008 biography.” Johanna’s husband, like Wilders’ paternal grandparents, was apparently Dutch.
Thus, on the basis of the information currently available, Wilders appears to be one-quarter Jewish (not Indo) and three-quarters Dutch.
Of course, further information would be helpful, since deception is taking place. This again underlines the limits of whiteness as a criterion.
Does Wilders’ part-Jewish ancestry explain his lifelong Jewish fanaticism?
As far as I’m concerned, Wilders is racially Jewish (non-white), no matter what views he holds. His Jewishness or non-Jewishness under Jewish law is of interest to me only academically. Jewish law does not supply the criteria I use to determine Jewishness.
But what about Jewish law? Because Wilders’ maternal grandmother was Jewish, his mother was also Jewish, even if the grandfather was Dutch. But if Wilders’ mother was Jewish, is Wilders also Jewish?
Perhaps, as one rabbi explained in a different (i.e., non-Wilders) context, Wilders was “born with a Neshamah, a Jewish soul. [This is a reference to the godly, non-animal soul possessed only by Jews as mentioned previously.] It is this Neshamah that pushes him to become a full-fledged Jew.”
Wilders conspicuously dyes his hair blond, a practice van Leeuwen took cheap shots at (as have others). This reeks of hypocrisy given that Europe is overrun by Jewish bottle blondes whose peroxide locks van Leeuwen and others have no problem with.
Finally, to illustrate the problematic nature of “whiteness,” here’s a photo of Austrian-born Nobel Prize-winning philosopher Friedrich Hayek in old age.
Of Central European ancestry, he was not a Jew. In his youth he was over six feet tall, had blond hair, and was not particularly Jewish-looking. His proclivity for outdoor activities such as hiking and mountain climbing, and his psychology and personal behavior, were also Aryan-like. However, he had a brother who as a young man looked so Jewish that people in Vienna—including upper class Viennese Jews—were convinced that the family was Jewish.
“Whiteness” is a complex issue in this anti- and post- European age, and lazy old guideposts as to who’s white and who’s not no longer serve.
Source: Counter-Currents Publishing