Jewamongyou

More on race versus color

Posted on August 3, 2010 by jewamongyou

I’m reading “Race” by John Baker and I just came across this (pg. 159):

Nevertheless, people do commonly make remarks about those non-white races that are in fact very different in morphological characters, to the effect that ‘the only thing that distinguishes them is the colour of their skin’. It scarcely seems possible to believe that anyone who has seen an Australian aborigine, a Melanesian, a Bushman, or a Negro could accept such words as true. They are directly contrary not only to the established facts of physical anthropology, but also to ordinary observation.
An albino Melanesid (Melanesian) or Negrid, who is fairer than any non-albino European, appears even more unlike a European than a normal Melanesid or Negrid. This fact was pointed out (with reference to Negrids) by the French mathematician Maupertuis more than two centuries ago. The association of a pale face and straw-coloured hair with the features of a non-Europid race brings out strongly the great differences that in fact exist. This is perhaps partly because darkness of the skin interferes with clear vision of the face. Indeed, if the skin were actually black (which it never is), it would be impossible to see any features, apart from the lips, gums, teeth, and whites of the eyes, except in profile.

Lately, I’ve been thinking about all those white women and girls I see walking with black men (some of them very ugly black men) and it has occurred to me that people are trained to detect beauty or ugliness more within their own race than outside of their own race. This is why we often hear (sometimes in jest) that “all Asians look alike” for example. Perhaps these foolish girls overlook the ugliness of their black boyfriends because they cannot see it. In their eyes, “blackness” is an attractive attribute in its own right and if those same black males woke up one morning with light skin, those girls might be revolted by what they see.
(added a few hours later):
I came across another worthy quote from Baker that I just couldn’t resist adding:

The question arises, why so many people say or imply that the races differ only in skin-colour, when this is obviously untrue. Those who minimize racial differences, by speaking as though the only distinction between a European and (for instance) a Chinese or a Negro were one of skin-colour, appear unwittingly to admit that recognition of the more fundamental differences that actually exist might affect people’s views on the ethnic problem; for it might be regarded as unlikely that such differences could coexist with exact similarity in the parts of the body concerned with thought and feeling.

This merits reading over several times because it is so profoundly true.

Posted in miscegenation, racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science | 12 Comments

The line of King David

Posted on August 2, 2010 by jewamongyou

Over the years I’ve known, and known of, several people who claimed to be descended from King David. Not that they could trace their ancestry back to him directly. Rather, they claimed to be descended from one or another famous rabbinical personality who, in turn, was reputed to have been descended from an earlier one who was claimed to be of the Davidic line.
One such individual, according to his followers, was the late Lubavitcher Rebbe. Though I cannot claim to have known him, I did meet him a few times and saw him speak on many occasions (in Yiddish, which I did not understand). By claiming their rebbe was descended from King David, his followers bolstered their claim that he was to be the messiah. I also knew others, humble Jews of lowly stations in life, who claimed descent from King David. No matter how lowly they were, their alleged royal ancestry would give them a sense of importance.
If I had to venture a guess, I would say that many more people are descended from King David than actually believe this to be the case. After all, his son, King Solomon, sired many children. By now, they are probably spread throughout the globe. Perhaps, given the prolific love lives of royalty, being descended from a king is not so special after all; it might be that an individual who is not descended from a king is the exception.
One of the longest lasting institutions, within Jewry, was based upon direct descent from King David: the “exilarch“, called “Resh Galutha” in Aramaic or “Rosh Galuth” in Hebrew. According to tradition, the first exilarch was Yehoyachin, the last monarch of Judah. From him, the title passed, father to son, through the rest of the Biblical era and more, having survived the Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Roman and the Sassanid empires. It lasted through the Mishnaic and Talmudic periods on through the age of those who immediately followed: the Savuraim. The line was almost extinguished at the end of the Sassanid empire and this is the tale of Bustenai.
The above manuscript is from my collection and tells the story of Bustenai. Following is an excerpt:

In the days of the kingdom of Persia, arose one stupid king. He took it upon himself to extinguish the royal seed. So he sought every Davidic household within his kingdom and killed them. He imprisoned the members of their households, their in-laws and their friends and he tortured them… and he had the pregnant women split open. But, in God’s mercy on the seed of the House of David, one bride remained after all the young men were killed – and she was pregnant…
And that king had a dream and they showed him standing in the garden of Betan and within it were trees beautiful to behold and for their fruit. And he knew that this garden was not his own so he threw its fruits to the ground in anger and jealousy and he went back to check if there were any roots so that he could dig them up so that it could never sprout again. After a while he found one root and from it was sprouting something like a branch from the Earth. So he raised his axe in order to destroy it and behold an old man stood before him and he was of ruddy complexion with beautiful eyes and a fine appearance. And (the old man) rebuked him a great rebuking and he cried a great and bitter cry and he snatched the axe from his hand and stuck it in (the king’s) forehead so that his blood flowed onto his face and onto his beard and his soul was close to death and he fell on his face to the ground and wept and pleaded with him. He said, “please, my master, let my pleadings fall before you so that you do not destroy me for what have I done to you and what is my sin and transgression that you tried to kill me?” So the old man answered and said, “this is very little considering the evil you have done for you have come to my garden…

To make a long story short, the old man was King David and he convinced the king to allow his line to continue through the pregnant woman who had been spared.
The office of the Exilarch flourished during Arab rule and began to wane by the 12th century. I remember reading, a while back, that the institution of the Exilarch was finally destroyed by Tamarlane in 1401 but now I’m having trouble finding a source for this.
One prominent family, that claims descent from King David, is the Meyuhas family. In fact, the very name “Meyuhas” means “pedigreed” in Hebrew. More certain is that they were among the Spanish Jews exiled by the inquisition. Below is one of several signatures from Moshe Mordechai Yosef Bechor Meyuhas (from the margins of one of my books):
The large symbol on the bottom is “S.T.” which stands for either “sofo tov (his end is good)” or “Sefaradi tahor” (pure Spanish).
As uncertain as their claims may be, I envy those whose family tradition includes descent from the kings of Israel. As satisfying as it is to be of Jewish heritage – not half Jewish and not a quarter Jewish – it would still be nice to know more specifics. To know which tribe I belong to. Looking at the story told by the Torah, I wonder if this sense of tribal identity is an underlying reason why the People of Israel was divided into twelve tribes, each with its own territory. That way, when a member of the tribe of Menashe traveled to the territory of Naftali, he would be conscious of his own distinctiveness and he would be recognizable as such through his cloths, his speech and his mannerisms. With this in mind, he would take care to be on his best behavior so as not to reflect badly upon his brethren back home. If all Israel were just one big mishmash, an individual would be accountable only to himself and his immediate family (who would usually remain anonymous). So, in a nutshell, with affiliation comes accountability. With accountability comes good behavior. We live in a world where the most potent type of affiliation, blood affiliation, is being eroded at alarming levels. Therefore, it should be no wonder that accountability is also eroding.

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel | 10 Comments

The Sherrod charade

Posted on July 31, 2010 by jewamongyou

For the past two generations, anti-white racism has been the norm rather than the exception. Very rarely does the MSM report it as such because to do so would make their pet ethnicities look bad and caste doubt on their entire Weltanschauung. This pattern is extremely consistent. Rarely is an exception made – and yet the Sherrod affair is being openly discussed in even the most leftist of publications. Or is it?
In the July 30th edition of The Columbian (a Washington state publication), we find (on page A2):

Sherrod was forced to resign after a conservative website posted an edited video of her speaking about race. Sherrod said the video took her remarks out of context.

According to this, she said nothing wrong. She simply “spoke about race” and this was enough to force her to resign. Curious indeed. Even more curious when we consider that the headline of said article reads “Obama talks race… on ‘The View'”. Is Obama being forced to resign?
A frequent commenter on this blog, Portland Realist, told me his theory on the Sherrod incident: the accusations, of anti-white racism, against her are so flimsy that leftists have seized upon it in order to use it as a straw man. In other words, their plan is to use this incident to convince people that just like the accusations against her are baseless, so too are most other charges of racism against non-whites.
I am convinced that Portland Realist is right. This publicity truly does fit in very nicely with the leftist agenda. Within the same issue of “The Columbian, we find an editorial by black columnist Eugene Robinson. Robinson reveals himself to be a shallow non-thinker when he writes:

A cynical right-wing propaganda machine is peddling the poisonous fiction that when African-Americans or other minorities reach positions of power, they seek some kind of revenge against whites…
With the Obama presidency, though, has come a flurry of charges – from the likes of Breitbart but also from more substantial conservative figures – about alleged incidents of racial discrimination against whites by blacks and other minorities…
These allegations of anti-white racism are being deliberately hyped and exaggerated because they are designed to make whites fearful…

As a matter of fact, whites really do have reason to be fearful when ruled over by blacks. Just ask the whites of South Africa or Detroit. I personally have known several whites who have suffered under black tyranny. The internet is full of such stories. Robinson is not only an idiot, he must have spent most of his life in a cave.

Obama snubs Boy Scouts

Posted on July 28, 2010 by jewamongyou

A while back I wrote about the Boy Scouts of America and how they have caved in to the cult of “diversity”. I documented how this once proudly American organization now pathetically seeks to recruit more black boys by using rap “music” in their presentations.
This is why I have no sympathy for them when Barry Soetoro – I mean Barack Obama – snubbed their invitation to speak for their 100th anniversary celebration. I do love it when leftists get bitten by their favorite pets. As for the many conservatives, who are part of Boy Scouts of America, one would hope that they are not too disappointed by this news. On the contrary, many of them are probably delighted that they have been spared the rantings of our socialist in chief.

Posted in shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 1 Comment

Afrocentrists doctor images

Posted on July 25, 2010 by jewamongyou

Those of you who have not yet discovered Mathilda’s anthropology blog, should certainly check it out. Though many of her posts are too scholarly for the average layman, there is plenty of material that even the average joe can appreciate. One such post concerns her discovery that afrocentric webmasters had been doctoring up images of ancient Egyptian artifacts in order to support their absurd claim that ancient Egyptians were black like themselves. Of course there were black Egyptians – but there were also red headed Egyptians with fair skin and everything in between. The majority of Egyptians were dark-skinned Caucasians of the Mediterranean type (just as they are today). Here is an excerpt from that post:

I’m not kidding. Someone sent me a hysterical comment claiming this was what they ‘really looked like’. After a bit of a laugh, I dug out the image I have of Meritaten (currently in the Louvre) to compare it.

This is Nefertiti’s daughter, Meritaten, wearing a Nubian wig. If you take a close look, you can see both statues have the same scars on the left cheek. It appears someone has stuck a dark coloured filter over the second image. If you take a look at the undoctored image you can see the patch of flesh coloured paint by her right eye, complete with eyeliner. I expanded this to cover part of her face with an art program and it’s in the same kind of skin tone range as most of the coffin and statue portraits I have, not black.

She goes on to describe other instances of this. Some afrocentrists posted comments to her blog and actually tried to justify this practice. Clearly shame and embarrassment do not figure prominently among them. I sympathize with her exasperation.
What kind of desperation would motivate people to hijack somebody else’s heritage and claim it as their own? There are even some blacks who claim that the ancient Jews (my own ancestors!) were black. Yes, we had black hair (as evidenced by the common Hebrew term for “young man”: “tishhoreth”) but certainly not black skin.
Any people, who cannot claim a civilization of their own, should seize the opportunity to create a brand new one according to their tastes. Starting from scratch is not always such a bad thing!

Posted in examples of propaganda, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 9 Comments

Let smokers be their own "race"

Posted on July 21, 2010 by jewamongyou

On my way to the beach recently, I noted how cigarette smokers flick their used butts out of their car windows onto the street. Any one of us has seen this behavior thousands of times by now. It is likely that not more than a handful of drivers even use their ash trays any more. It would not surprise me if many didn’t even know what purpose it is supposed to serve.
Upon my arrival at the beach, I noted the countless thousands of cigarette butts mixed in with the sand. So plentiful were they that one could not even find any two foot square area devoid of them. Clearly, many cigarette smokers consider the beach to be their own private ash tray.
It has not escaped my notice that criminals overwhelmingly tend to be cigarette smokers, nor do I think it is mere coincidence that impulsiveness and a general lack of concern for the rights of others seem to go hand in hand with this habit. Those who are considered “white trash” almost always smoke. Typically they can be found with a beer bottle/can in one hand and a cigarette in the other as they rattle off four-letter words.
As common as this habit seems to be in the U.S., it is far worse in other parts of the world. While in Beijing, I offended locals by calling their city “Phlegm City” to their face. In Beijing, one must always keep an eye on the ground before him to avoid stepping into this ubiquitous bodily fluid. In Egypt, they smoke a nasty cigarette called “Cleopatra”. They should have called it “Asp”. I’m pretty sure that American cigarette manufacturers send their nastiest (too-dangerous-for-American-consumption) products overseas. While in Israel, I was told that the most popular cigarette there, called “Time”, is none other than lower grade Marlboro that cannot be sold in the U.S. Many male Israelis have a ritual they follow when lighting up their cigarettes. They stand with one foot in front of the other and squint their eyes a certain way. After the cigarette is lit, they look up at the world as if they now have special powers. Everything about them says “I am macho”. In Europe, as I remember, almost everybody smokes. When I pointed out, to some locals in the Netherlands, that this is a nasty habit, one of them thoughtfully responded, “I guess it might be considered rather anti-social”. Yes, in my travels, I was ever the American anti-smoking missionary. Intent on teaching the world to be more like good Americans and refrain from smoking.
I have come to realize that my endeavors have been futile. It makes no more sense trying to transform a smoking society into a non-smoking one, as it does trying to transform a Negro society into a Caucasian one. The existence of cultured, conscientious smokers notwithstanding, overall I believe that smokers are an inferior race. Of course, unlike biological race (which one cannot choose for himself), a person does choose to become a smoker. At some point in his life, a person decides that he would be more “cool” if he were a smoker. At this point in history, he is certainly aware of the health risks and the annoyance to other people – but he doesn’t care. He is willing to increase his chances of disease, the risks of fire, to impose his litter on the rest of society, to inconvenience others with his stench, to yellow his teeth and alter his voice all in order to be more “cool”.
I now realize that there are actual benefits to cigarette smoking. A person can maintain his weight through smoking and I’m sure it is a great stress reliever. Perhaps it actually does aid in digestion. Certainly some smokers begin their habit after careful consideration and weighing of the costs versus the benefits. But those people are the exception. Most start because of a weakness that made them more vulnerable to peer pressure. This weakness is part of their personality and smoking is only a symptom of it. I am fairly certain that this weakness is linked to a high time preference. I am not simply guessing here; I have discussed this topic with many smokers – some of them quite close to me.
It hurts me to see those who are close to me taking up such an unhealthy habit because I do not enjoy seeing them putting themselves at higher risk for disease. It hurts me more to see them engage in an activity that ends up costing other people their hard earned money to pay for their medical costs and to clean up their mess or put out their fires. In essence, I am bothered more by the the moral downsides of smoking than by the its health risks.

Posted in Uncategorized | 22 Comments

Fun with H.B.D.

Posted on July 20, 2010 by jewamongyou

A while ago I made some t-shirts that look like this:
I regretting not having made the message more explicit (and that the text sounds rather silly). They never provoked any meaningful response. Today, I wore one to the dentist. The following was my exchange with the receptionist:
The receptionist: “what’s H.B.D.?”
Me: “human biodiversity. Just like there are different kinds of horses, fish and so on, so too there are different kinds of human.”
The receptionist: “So which one of those is human?”
Me: “All of them are modern humans. We’re all different and, though some people would like us all to be the same, I think these differences are wonderful.”
The receptionist: “One of them looks like a monkey.”
Me (laughing): “Do you mean this one? That’s an Australian Aborigine. That’s alright; I won’t tell him you said that.”
My next stop was the grocery store. At checkout, the older woman in front of me was tarrying. She turned and said to the young female clerk, “Jesus loves you.” As the older woman left, I smiled and told the clerk, “H.B.D. loves you” and I pointed to my t-shirt. I asked her, “can you guess which one is a modern human?” When she said she didn’t know, I told her, “all of them are”. She replied, “but they all look so different.” So I explained to her that each is a different race of humans. Now she knows that we are not all the same under the skin.

Posted in activism | 11 Comments

Homosexuality in Uganda

Posted on July 20, 2010 by jewamongyou

I highly recommend this video (no vulgarity in this one). Here we see the leftist media attempting to claim that anti-homosexual sentiment in Uganda is the result of cultural contamination by… you guessed it – the evil white man. It turns out that a small group of American activists visited Uganda to stir up opposition to the gay agenda. While ABC news claims that the draconian laws, proposed by the Ugandan government, were a direct result of such meddling, the spokesman for the church group, Scott Lively, defends himself very well against these accusations. Within the short interview, we can see that forces on the right are catching on to the tricks of the leftist media and not falling for their traps.
As for the Ugandan pastor, Martin Ssempa (featured in this YouTube (vulgarity warning) clip which I’d previously linked to), I have a new admiration for the man. Not that I agree with everything he says, but if you listen carefully to how he responds to Dan Harris (the reporter), you’ll see that he makes a lot of sense within the framework of his creed. He firmly defends his beliefs and goes on the offensive time after time. In defense of his showing homosexual pornography to a large audience, he replies that, “The problem is the absence of shock”. This response resonates on so many levels. If whites were to regain their sense of shock, many of the evils we now contend with would substantially diminish. When Mr. Harris brings up the “theory” that those who oppose homosexuality are likely homosexuals themselves, Mr. Ssempa retorts that this is like saying all who are opposed to terrorism must then be terrorists themselves and then laughs at the reporter. When Harris asks Ssempa if he worries about “whipping up hatred”, his answer is that he doesn’t worry about that at all. Instead, he worries about people like the reporter who lack understanding. In the end, both Mr. Lively and Mr. Ssempa accuse the reporter of being condescending and racist for believing that Ugandan sentiments against homosexuality could only have been brought about through white intervention.
The fact that so many of the commentators on YouTube actually believe the claim that white men brought homophobia to Africa shows how hopelessly brainwashed the masses really are. It also makes me wonder how they can believe that black Africans are our intellectual and moral equals and, at the same time, believe that a handful of white Americans could so easily sway an entire African country in this manner.

Posted in examples of propaganda, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 4 Comments

"Waking up" and Liberal blacks

Posted on July 19, 2010 by jewamongyou

Waking up

Race realists often wonder when the slumbering masses will “wake up”. Every time whites are subject to an atrocity (every day) or gross injustice (every day) we hear murmuring to the effect that “maybe this will wake them up”.
Race realists make up only a tiny percentage of the white population in America, and are almost non-existent among the young. As matters grow worse, and more obviously dangerous for whites, we might experience a modest increase in our numbers. However we should remember that the ruling elites equate race realism with “racism”. Therefore, if there is such an increase, those elites (government and the media) will attribute the bad tidings on that same increase in our numbers. They will say things like, “with the increase in racism among whites, some people of color have vented their anger and frustration by…” They will never acknowledge that blatant racism against whites might fuel white consciousness. Instead, they will claim the opposite. Unfortunately the masses, having been trained from childhood to be closed minded in racial matters, will buy into these blatant lies.

Liberal blacks

Being “liberal” is a bad thing, overall, for whites and Asians; it represents a step down from what they should be. Though I admit that hippies can sometimes be fun to be around and they are generally not dangerous in a direct physical way, nevertheless, they are not well. The way they vote, their bumper stickers and their protests often work to the detriment of society. Their lack of tolerance is legendary. But the sincerely “liberal” NAM is a rarity. For him, being a tree-hugging, peace activist member of PETA is a step up. NAM’s in general, and blacks in particular, will vote for leftist political parties only because they believe that this will serve their best interests – not because they actually buy into the leftist message as a whole.
I found this interesting video on OneSTDV (crude language warning!).
While there are pro-homosexual organizations in Africa, the vast majority of their members are certainly homosexuals simply looking out for their own self interests. I doubt that a majority of straight Africans will ever have great sympathy for them. Why should they, if they are not homosexual themselves? Even in California, a majority of blacks voted in favor of proposition 8 (against gay marriage).
While it is acceptable to point out that blacks generally do not support the “gay agenda”, we do not find many honest answers as to why this is so. Some claim that the mobilization of black churches is what drove black support for proposition 8 in California. If this were the case, then why are black churches so unsuccessful in curbing black crime and promiscuity? I think the reason is that most blacks are not homosexual. Since casting a ballot takes little effort, and since the measure would not adversely effect them directly, this was an easy way to strike a blow against a group of people they hold in contempt.
Fully 70% of California blacks voted in favor of proposition 8. I think it is reasonable to assume that a large proportion of the 30% that opposed it are, themselves, homosexual. After all, the measure directly pertains to homosexuals, so naturally they would be more motivated to take the time to vote against it. Let us modestly estimate that a third of the blacks who voted against proposition 8 were homosexual. This leaves 20% of straight voting blacks who voted against it. Are one in five California blacks true “liberals” or were they only fired up by this one issue?
A narrow majority of Californian whites voted against proposition 8. Suffice it to say their reasoning was probably a bit more sophisticated. Like blacks, most whites are also not homosexual, but more of them are able to look beyond what is good for their own group. On the whole, it is likely that California whites are more religious than California blacks. Their religion is, of course, “liberalism”. “Liberalism” preaches that homosexuality is morally equal to heterosexuality and, therefore, deserving of the same rights. What we have here is an unholy marriage between the religion of “liberalism” and natural white altruism. Together, they were able to cause most California whites to vote against proposition 8. Both “liberalism” and altruism are weak among blacks – and hence the numbers we see.

Posted in racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 3 Comments

Alien adoptions

Posted on July 13, 2010 by jewamongyou

Over the years, I’ve been in the habit of reading articles, and even whole books, without having a clue who the author is. I’ll pick up books from the library and read them cover to cover. When I’m done, I might then ask myself, “I wonder who the author is.” I never gave much thought to this habit; it just seemed natural. Now that I think about it, it seems like a good habit because the words carry their own value regardless of who wrote them. We so often decide that we dislike this or that person and so we reject him. In so doing, we might be missing out on valuable information, even if we believe that person to be a liar.
I should be sleeping right now. Alas, sleep eludes me. So I got up to read a random article and it happened to be about international adoptions. The article claims that the enthusiasm American white women have for adopting alien children is an offshoot of the missionary spirit. It says that, while such behavior is rooted in noble intentions, in reality it is detrimental to our nation. I couldn’t agree more and you can read the article here. The author is non other than the controversial David Yeagley.
Yeagley covers many aspects of this phenomenon, but one question he does not ask is this: sub-Saharan Africa has the highest fertility rates in the world. Women typically have five or six children. This being the case, why is it that African women are not lining up to adopt those orphans? Certainly there are enough barren African women who should be willing to adopt African children and raise them as their own. In most cases, had she not been barren, she would be raising several of her own children. I wonder if anybody has ever asked those African women why they do not simply adopt. I’m sure some of them do (mainly from their own tribe), but my guess is that most of them would answer, “why should I raise somebody else’s child?” In other words, it would not benefit the genetic interests of their own tribe to adopt a child of a different tribe. Therefore, such an act would be unthinkable. Those African women, being closer to nature, are in touch with their genetic selves. White women, in contrast, are divorced from their own nature. This is the flip side of the “noble intent” Yeagley describes.

Posted in miscegenation, racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 8 Comments