Israelis Vs. Jews: Revisiting Nixon’s Folly


Gregory Hood's Strategy Has Already Been Tried

Gregory Hood’s Strategy Has Already Been Tried

Nearly half a century ago, President Richard Nixon, a man acutely aware of Jewish power and perfidy, arrived at a diabolically clever way to combat the corrosive Jewish influence in American politics, media, finance, and academia: promote and protect a cabal of Israel-oriented conservative nationalist Jews in opposition to the liberal cosmopolitan Jews who were subverting America’s institutions. With the benefit of hindsight, we see what a disastrous mistake this was, one in which America’s conservatives saved Jews the trouble of subverting and perverting our interests by directly handing the other half of American politics over to them on a silver platter.

The neocon Jewish faction has enjoyed unparalleled and uncontested control of the GOP and affiliated institutions ever since. Contrary to popular belief in reactionary circles, there is a meaningful difference between Democrats and Republicans in American politics, and that meaningful difference is that the DNC is firmly controlled by the liberal cosmopolitan internationalist half of Organized Jewry and the RNC is firmly controlled by the conservative parochial Israeli Nationalist half of Organized Jewry. What many–including Gregory Hood in his latest Israelis vs. Jews piece at Radix–fail to recognize is that these two halves are complementary halves of a coherent anti-White and anti-Christian whole.

As I explain in my Occidental Observer article, Imperial Jews and International Jews, this separation is as old as the Jewish group evolutionary strategy itself, with the Israeli state replacing the scattered shtetls of yore and anti-ZIonist liberal hipster Jews replacing the ambitious merchants of yore who left the ghetto to trade with the goyim. The former have always been generally pious, parochial, and prone to procreate while the latter have always been generally more irreverent, relativistic, and barren. What Gregory Hood, Richard Nixon, and many other observers of Jewish behavior and identity don’t seem to appreciate is that the former is a cauldron which reliably spews forth the latter.

The Israeli Jews and American Jews are different things in the same way magma and lava–or meteors and meteorites–are different things. Gregory Hood is correct that the cosmopolitan American Jews are barren, integrating, and choking on the fumes of their own socio-cultural concoctions, but that’s irrelevant because they’re disposable within the reproductive strategy of Organized Jewry. The phenomenon itself of less disciplined and loyal folks spilling out of a disciplined and loyal community isn’t unique to Jewry. I have a leftist lesbian friend whose father is nominally Christian, whose grandfather is Mennonite, and whose great-grandfather was Amish. The FLDS eject a steady stream of “lost boys” into our mass society. Mexico has dumped tens of millions of its underclass into American mass society, which has increasingly become the preferred dumping ground of every tribe’s defects and remainders.

Sarah Silverman

American Jews

Within that familiar pattern, Organized Jewry offers a twist, weaponizing those drifting out of Jewry against the host population. While Sarah Silverman is too decadent, undisciplined, and barren to succeed at being an Orthodox Jewess with a large family in Israel or New Jersey, she serves Jewish interests and enjoys the support of her co-ethnics by helping subvert and pervert her tribe’s host society by any means necessary. Hood presumes that the hyper-fertile ultra-Orthodox communities in Israel are parasitical because, coming from the American conservative tradition, he presumes that anybody getting paid by the state to reproduce is some kind of freeloader. In actuality, Organized Jewry is simply investing in its future generations of mildly religious, secular, and outright degenerate Jews, thinking and acting generationally while we’re incapable of thinking much past the next election cycle.

In a startling display of effrontery, bordering perhaps on outright chutzpah, Hood goes on to not only explain what the Jews are up to, but second-guess it in light of his flawed model; “If I were in Netanyahu’s position, I would…

Nonsense. All nonsense, and Netanyahu knows better.

Israel is playing the game exactly the way it needs to play to win it, and Hood’s advice to step away from the table and cash its chips before it runs out of luck both underestimates Jewish ambition and underestimates the many advantages the Jewish people in general and the Jewish state in particular enjoy at the moment. They’re successfully winning against their Arab neighbors in terms of resource acquisition, population growth, and military might. As such, they stand to gain from generally destabilizing the Middle East, which will steadily open up more opportunities for growth and expansion of their state beyond its current borders. Hood’s advice is tantamount to advising America’s founding fathers to call it quits at the Mississippi River and respect the treaties and territories of the Plains Indians despite the inevitability of Manifest Destiny in light of the lopsided demographic and logistical advantages we pale faces enjoyed at that time.

It’s not as if the Arabs or Persians can stop them, and it’s not as if the West would stop them. The only thing that can stop the Zionist project from manifesting its goal of expanding out into the full borders of Greater Israel is either an unforeseen Black Swan event or some kind of crisis and failure within Israel’s ultra-Orthodox communities which causes the cauldron of Jewry to collapse in on itself into an eroding caldera. All Israel needs to do is exactly what it’s doing, stoke chaos, infighting, and confusion about borders and boundaries throughout the Middle East. Contrary to Israeli and American conservative belief, Iranians achieving “the bomb” wouldn’t be a game-changer, as any state sophisticated and stable enough to develop and wield nuclear weaponry is categorically sane enough to refrain from inviting its own annihilation at the hands of Israel and its “allies” (puppets).

Israeli Jews

Israeli Jews

Toward the end of the article, Hood cashes in on his implicit and romantic appeal to not be opposed to militaristic Jews with a direct plea to ally with them in their internal tension with them damn dirty hippy Jews. “But if forced to choose between the tactics of Israel’s ethnocentric garrison state and the left wing Culture of Critique we encounter at home, the former is less objectionable and harmful.” It’s indeed less objectionable and harmful to be punched in the gut than kicked in the groin, but the arms and legs belong to a singular entity which is attacking us in different places and in different ways. While pornography and all those dreadful commercials promoting racial integration and faggotry get pretty tiresome, I’m not quite sure if they’re as problematic as the thousands and thousands of American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent Arabs who’ve been slaughtered by the less vulgar and subversive neocon limb of Organized Jewry.

Just when I thought it couldn’t get any worse, Hood alleges that the fate of the Zionist state is in grave danger, and we must act now to rescue it from oblivion (which would be bad for us). “Secondly, more importantly, and certainly more controversially, we have nothing to gain from the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state (have at it, comments section). I’ll go further—the end of Israel as a Jewish state is likely to increase the power of left wing Jews globally, not decrease it.” While I reject genocide on moral grounds in favor of mere marginalization and containment, I can’t help but point out that if the world’s hyper-fertile militaristic ultra-Orthodox Jews vanished, within a handful of generations, the Jewish communities of the world would seamlessly integrate into their host societies and cease to be a relevant threat to our survival.

Fortunately for me, he published this article during Lent, so I had the benefit of reading his next angle on an empty stomach. He appeals to our supposed supremacist contempt for brown foreigners in his plea for us to double down on Nixon’s Folly. “Besides, would you want to live in, or even visit ‘liberated’ Palestine? Probably no more than most of those ‘anti-apartheid activists’ wanted to stick around their precious new Rainbow Nation.” Either we support sovereignty and identity as a guiding principle or we don’t. As noted earlier, I don’t even begrudge the right of the Jews to exist and have their own state even as their denial of that to myself and my future generations is nearly a fait accompli. Though, as a matter of personal taste, I enjoy the company of the Arab Christians they’re genocidally attacking nearly much as I enjoy the company of my own people, and I would certainly rather suffer Islamic Palestinians over Israeli Jews if forced into such an awful hypothetical conundrum.

Together Forever

Together Forever

We have to confront the possibility that a real split is developing between ‘Israelis’ and ‘Jews’.” No. We don’t. The split is as old as Organized Jewry itself. This is a domestic dispute we have no part in and no side to take. A nugget of politically incorrect folk wisdom I picked up from my trailer park upbringing is that if you witness a man striking his girlfriend while at the bar, it’s unwise to white knight for the woman, as the both of them will turn on a dime against you, leaving you beaten and humiliated for your trouble (If she’s genuinely trying to leave him and has directly asked for help, that’s a different situation. I’m still a proponent of intelligent white knighting). Zionist Jews and Globalist Jews may be engaged in an epic domestic dispute which is shaking the dishware and waking the neighbors, but don’t think for a moment that an attempt to take one side against the other will prove fruitful for our cause.

The actual answer to the Jewish Question lies first in spiritual warfare against the seven deadly sins they (and other opponents) consistently use to subvert both our individuals and our institutions. Subsequently, and only after girding ourselves with spiritual discipline, we must simply and directly oppose Jews and Jewish interests in our nations. It’s really that simple. They’re a hostile invasive tribe who threaten our welfare and very survival and they must be steadily and consistently opposed until they find our communities hostile enough to warrant emigrating to softer targets.

We can’t outsmart them. We can’t out-“conspire” them. We can’t out-Jew the Jew. But we can strengthen our collective will and defeat them in a battle of wills. Simply. Directly. Honorably. We can win, and secure a fruitful future for ourselves and our children in the process. Victory doesn’t lie in Nixon’s or Hood’s clever triangulations, but rather in Corneliu Codreanu and his Iron Guard’s model of spiritual warfare and simple opposition.


  • Eric

    Pretending Jews are in some sort of competition, ideologically or otherwise, is ridiculous. They’re all on the same side ,no real angles here.

  • Lew

    The best artists don’t produce masterpieces every time. Bobby Fischer lost occasionally. Even the masters fail every now and then.

    I love Gregory Hood’s work. He is an important writer. Certainly anyone reading at TYN that is not familiar with his writings should become familiar with them right away.

    But, he is playing with fire in that Radix essay.

    • tradyouth

      Agreed, and I retain a tremendous amount of respect for Gregory Hood.

  • Eric

    Gregory Hood doesn’t deserve any respect. Anyone who intertwines the fate of whites with Jews in any context, even in clever backhanded ways like Gregory Hood likes to do, is an enemy of our race.

    Gregory says there’s some difference between “left-wing jews” and “right-wing Jews”, so then how does he explain Netanyahu going to Greece and preaching peace, tolerance and multiculturalism after praising the Greek government for imprisoning Golden Dawn?

    • Lew

      Gregory Hood doesn’t deserve any respect. Anyone who intertwines the fate of whites with Jews in any context, even in clever backhanded ways like Gregory Hood likes to do, is an enemy of our race.

      I can’t go near that far. Hood has produced a large body of incisive writings on a wide range of subjects political and cultural. That has to count for something. He was honest about his position. Although, I suppose that when one has a plan to sell, you can’t sell the plan without saying what it is. Still, I’d much rather he stake out an honest position openly if it’s what he really believes than hide it to please an audience and write things that he does not believe are true.

  • Lew

    Well, if the right didn’t have bad luck, it would have no luck. Losing Hood to the philo-Semitic camp is a pretty serious disappointment. So it goes.

    • karsten

      Hood has been hypnotized by the Neoreax, who are overwhelmingly philosemites. Which proves a point that I have always made: Neoreaction is to true reaction/traditionalism what Neoconservatism is to true conservatism — i.e., Neoreaction is a blatant attempt to get out in front of true reaction/traditionalism and shape it for Jewish ends.

    • Lew

      Hood has been hypnotized by the Neoreax, who are overwhelmingly philosemites. Which proves a point that I have always made: Neoreaction is to true reaction/traditionalism what Neoconservatism is to true conservatism — i.e., Neoreaction is a blatant attempt to get out in front of true reaction/traditionalism and shape it for Jewish ends.

      Well that’s too bad. If what you say about neo-reaction (NR) is true, and I happen to believe you just put the hammer on the head of the nail, Hood should have tied himself to the mast, or put wax in his ears, rather than be drawn toward the rocks by the Sirens’ call. I’ve no idea what’s in Hood’s head and won’t speculate on it. The essay, as I’ve said, is a disappointment to me. Perhaps he will rethink it at some point. But, let me leave Hood and his essay aside and use your comment to muse a bit about NR in general and subversion.

      First, let me state the obvious. Our enemies have shown themselves to be geniuses at finding ways to make their ideas seem appealing. Sometimes, they do this by promoting ideas that are appealing. No one would take up their ideas if they were not on some level appealing. Our enemies have found ways to appeal to white gentiles from widely varying backgrounds, temperaments, religions and knowledge bases, and from every cognitive, social and class strata. Often, they pursue a strategy of packaging truthful ideas that are appealing with other things that will undermine the potency of the good ideas for subverting the existing order or somehow having value for white gentiles.

      Second, we know our enemies operate on much longer time horizons than we do. And in politics, what matters most is always the next generation. We can, I think, safely assume they understand this. And within the next generation specifically, the biggest potential threat, and hence the most important target for attack and neutralization, is the next generation’s best and the brightest. They’re the ones with the potential form and lead an intellectual vanguard.

      So think about it. A youthful, cognitively elite (IQ > 145) white male shut out of a promotion in favor of a cognitively elite Indian due to Indian ethnic nepotism in Silicon Valley, or even the company down the street, and whose idea of entertainment is Men Among the Ruins, is, potentially, a dangerous subversive in the making. He may come to realize that although the vast majority of his Indian peers and their families are good, decent and kind people with not the slightest ill will toward anyone, Indians still have their ethnic networks, and he does not. And that guy, who may grow annoyed at these external limitations, probably has similarly bright peers he might start talking to, and they might start talking to people. And that could be a problem. So how do you nip it in the bud when the target audience and potential intellectual vanguard to be nipped is too smart to fall for the standard bullshit?

      On this particular issue, our enemies have quite the tall order. It’s a tough but vital problem for them to solve. If you think about it, they not only need to capture the imagination of the agile minds that might seed a new vanguard but also draw them into actively wasting their time or even working against their own interests with realizing it. To do that, you are going to need a lot more than a series of individually appealing ideas – or warmed over gruel like paleo-conservatism with HBD insights bolted on; you are going to need a whole worldview that is appealing to people revolted by this culture, and that is where the “Neo-Reaction” and “Dark Enlightenment” sectors come in.

      NR is very well organized. It is impressive. For an intellectual thread that exists mainly online, NR makes the most of it with their aggregators, crisp summaries of their world views, summaries of the points of conversion and disagreement among the various strands of NR thought, and their PDF libraries served off of github and such things.

      They fact that NR is so well organized is attractive and impressive in itself. But, something definitely smells about NR and, predictably, it’s from the same stable. A quick look, for example, at their recommended reading lists shows they all have one thing in common. The NR writers seem to have identified every anti-modern, anti-liberal, anti-Western thinker with valuable things to say about the state of affairs, but without fail there are always some conspicuously glaring omissions.

      The omissions matter as much as the inclusions because misleading people by omission is not possible without…omissions.

      The blog “Reaction Times” seems pretty typical. The author writes about his list of works:

      Every worthwhile political philosophy builds on the thoughts of great thinkers of the past. Neoreaction is no exception. Below is a collection of works, arranged by topic, which either have influenced neoreaction, described the cancers inflicting modern society, or torn down the lies upon which modernity is built. Most of the authors below are not neoreactionaries.

      Yet this list, which is long on some pretty obscure thinkers, omits scholarly works exposing modern cancers by Francis Parker Yockey, Revilo P. Oliver and Kevin MacDonald. What would explain that? Come on.

      I personally believe that NR might have something to offer cognitively elite white gentiles who want something reactionary as long as they are comfortable being shut out of power and influence because they’re not part of any ethnic network, be it Han, Indian or Jewish. NR might be a good choice for the aspiring white gentile screen writer who doesn’t care about moving up in Hollywood or getting access to New York insiders, or the mathematician who doesn’t mind Flyover U over Harvard, or the programmer who doesn’t care too much about the promotion. Myself, I’ll believe access to ethnic networks don’t matter among the globe’s cognitive elites when top-flight Israeli, Indian and Chinese universities and business organizations begin putting their cognitively elite white gentile peers on an equal footing. Has that happened yet?

      The cognitively elite white gentiles who are attracted to NR ought to be smart to enough to understand that great intelligence does not provide wisdom that can only be acquired thorough experience. And great intelligence does not do anyone any good without the right knowledge base to make informed decisions. From that standpoint, the omission of works by Yockey, Oliver and MacDonald in NR canon makes perfect sense …

  • Ezra Pound’s Ghost

    “…which causes the cauldron of Jewry to collapse in on itself into an eroding caldera.” Stop it, Matt! You’re getting me all hot and bothered! Excellent article. “The actual answer to the Jewish Question lies first in spiritual warfare against the seven deadly sins.” Something like this our atheist and “pagan” friends like Hood will never understand. With ‘enemies’ like Greg Hood, the Jews don’t need any shabbos goyim. Anyone in our movement who advocates working with or for the would-be Jewish “state” – for whatever reason – should be treated as if they were spreading AIDS among our people.

  • Kievsky

    This is a brilliant debate, and I hope Gregory Hood is not disheartened in any way, because he made a very important conversation starter about this. Hood brings up points that sound very reasonable to me, but then Matt’s counterpoint provided an even better clarification of our values.

    It’s healthy when someone presents an idea that is then opposed, because it clarifies for all of us. Kevin Macdonald once wrote that we should not vocally oppose the Jewish ethnostate being as we want a white ethnostate. that kind of rattled around in the back of my head, but I also like the idea of not getting between a fight between a husband and wife outside a bar.

    Also, the idea that the Orthodox replenishes the secular cultural marxist gene pool makes sense, and we should have our own Orthodox culture like Amish type disciplined and very religious and very fertile but also very much into science/business et cetera,, but we accept that a certain amount of them to go and become more secular, urban “mindweapon” types. We replensih that gene pool from our farms and workshops and community schools.

    Those Jews got it all figured out, don’t they? I hadn’t thought about the fertile Orthodox replenishing the Cultural Marxisters. That well ain’t drying up any time soon.

    So Matt gave me a religious education in this post — I always wondered, how is the Christian religion even practiced? What does one do on a daily basis besides pray? Here it is:

    The actual answer to the Jewish Question lies first in spiritual warfare against the seven deadly sins they (and other opponents) consistently use to subvert both our individuals and our institutions. Subsequently, and only after girding ourselves with spiritual discipline, we must simply and directly oppose Jews and Jewish interests in our nations. It’s really that simple. They’re a hostile invasive tribe who threaten our welfare and very survival and they must be steadily and consistently opposed until they find our communities hostile enough to warrant emigrating to softer targets.

    That’s it right there. That could be, with some editing, a mission statement. That’s worth memorizing.

  • Eric

    Neo-reactionaries tend to be hyper-individualist disgruntled conservatives, which is where all sympathies with the closest thing to a physical incarnation of evil come from. Conservative is a disease much like AIDS, it can be treated and controlled over a lifetime, but the way people with that personality or temperment tend to see the world (superfluously) can never be fully cured…no matter how smart or dumb they are. The only way to treat them is to constantly challenge any and all ideas that have a conservative orientation.

Gregory Hood's Strategy Has Already Been Tried

By: Matt Parrott


Matt is a founding member of TradYouth and is currently the project's Chief Information Officer. He's been active in the White Identity cause for years, primarily as a blogger but also as a street activist and regional organizer.
%d bloggers like this: