A Taste of Medicine
Entering the Inevitable Abyss of the “JQ” (Stories We Tell Ourselves or Stories We Are Ourselves, part 8)
“The island of doubt/Is like a taste of medicine
Working by hindsight/We got the message from the oxygen.”
~ Talking Heads, “Cross-Eyed and Painless”
For Yahweh’s Sake, Do We Really Need to Talk About the Jews?
“If the Jew as immaculately innocent and eternal victim paradigm is obviously inaccurate, it doesn’t follow that the exact opposite must be the case.” ~Colin Wright, in comments section to American Pravda: Oddities of the Jewish Religion, by Ron Unz
There are two kinds of conspiracy researcher: those who talk about the JQ, and those who do not.
Those who talk about the JQ tend to centralize it and to refer, obliquely or directly, to an over-arching, unified agenda of “international Jewry.”
There is a third kind of researcher, one that is neither fish nor fowl, who avoids the JQ while nonetheless advocating a unified conspiracy by a single group. “Illuminati” is the most obvious place-keeper for this mysterious group-agenda, one that obviously has far less identifiable historical or cultural attributes (anyone could be “Illuminati”). Famous conspiracy pundit David Icke has been accused of using the word “Illuminati” while “really meaning” “the Jews.” (Actually, Icke does directly name the Jews quite a lot.)
The gulf between the two types of conspiracy researchers is such that the longstanding and quite respectable conspiracy discussion forum, Rigorous Intuition (which I have frequented over the years), has rules against Holocaust denial, and in the past has shown little tolerance for the idea of a “global Jewish conspiracy.”
(For a comprehensive, responsible, and intelligent analysis of the “JQ,” I recommend “The complicated relationship between the central bank owners and the Jewish people,” from The Neo-Feudal Review.)
The gulf between conspiracy researchers (for and against the JQ) currently does seem to be narrowing, however, due to a number of factors. Primary among these factors are the following:
1) A Jewish element directing some world affairs is becoming increasingly difficult to deny
2) Belief in “a Jewish conspiracy” is becoming more and more widespread, tangible, and visible, and therefore has to be acknowledged, one way or another
3) Because of 1), this widespread belief/meme can’t be dismissed as merely “anti-Semitism,” especially as the charge of “anti-Semitism” to quell such discussions itself offers more and more indisputable evidence of 1)
In thirty years of conspiracy research, besides one chapter in (the self-redacted) Homo Serpiens, I have remained in the first “camp,” and hardly written or spoken about the JQ at all. This hasn’t been solely—or even primarily—out of a desire to be diplomatic, strategic, or to avoid cancellation or accusations of anti-Semitism.
The fact is that the areas I have chosen to research (Hollywood notwithstanding!) have not, until now, especially pointed to a Jewish element at play. Even in my most thorough mapping of long-term, global engineering, Vice of Kings, “the Jews” only came up a couple of times with any kind of indisputable clarity.
(Admittedly, I didn’t do a head-count of ethnic or religious backgrounds, and had I chosen to use that particular lens, it might have been a very different book; ditto 16 Maps of Hell.)
Now that I am venturing into these waters, of necessity because of the subject matter, I find myself straddled over an abyss that separates two abysses. Abysmal!
The Final Frontier?
“The public does not realize that in selecting the sequence of images, I play on the nerves of the audience like a musician playing the organ.” —Alfred Hitchcock
The abyss on one-side of me is the squeamish and evasive refusal to acknowledge a Jewish factor within global power structures (such as the children of Roth), that may or may not be central, but is (surely indisputably) present and significant, while largely unaccounted for in “acceptable” discourse.
The other abyss that yawns is the tendency to plunge prematurely into a pre-cooked blancmange of a “Jew World Order.” (Shudder.)
Everyone knows that talk of an “international Jewish conspiracy” is offensive. Some choose to back away for this reason, while others choose to double-down and move into attack mode.
In a climate where anything critical about a Jewish (or even a Zionist) element in society leads to accusations of anti-Semitism, inciting hatred, or of having Nazi sympathies, it’s easy to understand a desire to be deliberately offensive and exaggerate one’s position, even lampoon it, to say anything and everything about “the jews,” consequences be damned.
I can also understand—in a climate created by such doubling-down—how any talk at all of a Jewish conspiracy (no matter how specific or fact-based) might make Jewish (and other) persons extremely nervous, even terrified, and correspondingly reactive, censorious, and aggressive.
Both “sides” are being played like Alfred Hitchcock’s organ (no pun intended). They are being played both independently and off of one another, so all such temptations to double-down—into one sandbagged narrative or the other—should be deftly sidestepped.
Not to do so is to become one more discrodant note within the same schismogenetic organ-grinder we are struggling to get free from.
For any readers who may be new to this site, The Children of Job is named for a book in the Old Testament, and it began with a series of essays looking at that book and at other Hebrew scriptures. If all goes according to plan, it will return to that focus again, albeit through a lens newly configured by this latest, very different series on illegitimate narratives, social engineering, and “Holocaust Denial.” Talk about bridging an Abyss!
As a researcher both of ancient scripture and geopolitical conspiracies at this final frontier of unsayable propositions, I am less concerned with giving offense or causing alarm among uninformed citizens (Jewish or otherwise) than of feeding into any illegitimate narrative, whether that of an actual, existing controlling worldly faction, or an only partially “grass roots” controlled opposition.
Why? Because the massive, off-gassing death star of the meme of “Jewish conspiracy”—whenever it lacks sufficient nuance and qualifiers, at least—is a narrative whose gravitational pull inevitably threatens to drag even the most serious researcher into cataclysmic orbit.
Because there are no winning sides in a war within the collective body of humanity.
Anti-Semitic Sacrifices
“Jews would have been less than human had they eschewed any notion of superiority altogether.” —Charles Silberman, quoted by Norman Finkelstein, The Holocaust Industry
There are many kinds of Jews; and among those many kinds, there are many individuals. At best, it seems to me, the word “Jewish” can be used as an adjective followed by a noun, as in: Jewish bankers, Jewish Bolsheviks, Jewish movie moguls, or Jewish power elite. But even here, the question first needs to be addressed: what do we mean by “Jewish”? And do any but the (really) Jewish really know?
Before we get to that, however, I first want to address the problem of “Anti-Semitism.” By this I mean the problem of anti-Semitism both with and without scare quotes: as a reality and as linguistic weapon of censorship and control. Why has there been so much of both these things, throughout the ages and across the world, and why does no one seem to want to ask that question?
Is it partially because, even to ask the question, itself is to risk accusations of anti-Semitism?
Ernst Nolte
To illustrate, let’s take the case of the German historian and philosopher Ernst Nolte, who died in 2016 at aged 93 and whose major interest was the comparative studies of fascism and communism. In a 1994 interview with Der Spiegel magazine, Nolte stated: “I cannot rule out the importance of the investigation of the gas chambers in which they looked for remnants of the [chemical process engendered by Zyklon B].” He added, for safety’s sake, “Of course, I am against revisionists, but Fred Leuchter’s ‘study’ of the Nazi gas ovens has to be given attention because one has to stay open to ‘other’ ideas.”
Today, Nolte has his own section at Wikipedia’s Holocaust Denial page, and the above quote comes from there, taken from an essay called “The Psychological Satisfaction of Denials of the Holocaust or Other Genocides by Non-Extremists or Bigots, and Even by Known Scholars,” by Israel W. Charny (Idea Journal, July 2001). Were the scare quotes around the words “study” and “other” indicated by Nolte at the time, inserted willy-nilly by Spiegel editors, or suggested by Nolte and/or his publicity advisors afterward? They seem meant to imply that, to Nolte, Leuchter was less than a genuine or sincere researcher. Yet this is directly contradicted by Nolte’s actual words.
Whatever the case, the scare quotes were not enough to hold back the ire of orthodox academia. Wikipedia claims that Richard J. Evans’ 1989 book, In Hitler’s Shadow, describes Nolte’s reputation as “in ruins” as a result of his controversial statements. In fact, Evans’ words were considerably less severe, but their spirit is roughly intact. Deborah Lipstadt in a 2003 interview said this:
Historians such as the German Ernst Nolte are, in some ways, even more dangerous than the deniers. Nolte is an anti-Semite of the first order, who attempts to rehabilitate Hitler by saying that he was no worse than Stalin; but he is careful not to deny the Holocaust. Holocaust-deniers make Nolte’s life more comfortable. They have, with their radical argumentation, pulled the center a little more to their side. Consequently, a less radical extremist, such as Nolte, finds himself closer to the middle ground, which makes him more dangerous (emphasis added)
To Lipstadt, it is a crime to place the Jewish holocaust and Hitler in the context of world history, and thereby deny them their special place in modern mythology, as the ultimate victims, the ultimate atrocity, and the ultimate evil, respectively.
“The most ‘insidious’ forms of Holocaust denial, Lipstadt suggests, are ‘immoral equivalencies’: that is, denying the uniqueness of The Holocaust” (Finkelstein, The Holocaust Industry, p. 70)
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Children of Job: Where Faith & Hubris Meet to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.