I have been reading Eric's articles for quite some time and have published many of them on Veterans Today. I greatly appreciate his work. However, one thing that continues to surprise me is that Eric has specifically avoided mentioning the neoconservative movement as a Jewish movement in any of his work. To my knowledge, I have not seen an article where Eric directly addresses the issue of Jewish subversive movements. My simple question is: why? Help us unravel this mystery, Eric.
Jonas, I am no more interested in"Jewish subversive movements" than I am in "Christian subversive movements" or "Muslim subversive movements," or etc., because a religion is a category of people who believe in a particular Scripture as being sourced from a 'God' who is All-Powerful and who also believe that Might makes right, and because all such Scriptures are myths that were created and ultimately canonized by the founders of that particular religion, and because all such Scriptures are dangerous and harmful to base an ethic (or morality) upon, and because all such Scriptures that I have studied are loaded with self-contradictions so that any of its believers can pick and choose which of its statements to base his/her morality upon. I am instead interested in the actual structure of power within a given society, and this always has to do with, if the society is an aristocracy, the super-rich controlling the Government, or else, if the society is a theocracy, the top clerics controlling the Government, or else, if the society is a democracy, the majority of the residents being honestly informed and controlling the Government. Since you appear to be obsessed with religion or specifically with Judaism, I would point out to you that even if a person is a resident or even a citizen in a theocracy such as Israel or Iran, that individual might be subversive for democracy, and there is then certainly no reason to do as you do and to include that person in the blame for what that theocracy does. I consider doing so to be an example of bigotry.
Thank you for your response, Eric. I will expand on my thoughts in a future article on Veterans Today. Your comment is intriguing, especially considering that scholars from various disciplines have extensively explored these issues. For example, do you consider Murray Friedman’s study, The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy (Cambridge University Press, 2006), to be obsessive or bigoted? Would you categorize Murray Friedman as part of the so-called bigotry you mentioned?
What about John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt’s The Israel Lobby or Francis Fukuyama’s essay in the New York Times, "After Neoconservatism," where he equates the Neoconservative movement with Stalinism and Leninism? I can cite numerous scholars who have been writing on this topic for over twenty years. It seems quite irresponsible to dismiss their work as bigotry.
My question remains: if I cite these scholars and present evidence demonstrating that the Neoconservative movement is a Jewish intellectual movement that has caused significant problems for the United States, is that genuinely bigotry? Or could it be that you are unwilling to follow the evidence to its logical conclusion?
It is equally irresponsible to characterize my writing as an obsession with Judaism. I have addressed topics such as Zionism, Islam, and other religions, so such a characterization is unfair and inaccurate.
In any case, I plan to delve deeper into these issues in my upcoming article on Veterans Today. I will share the article with you once it is published.
Neoconservatism didn't start with any Americans in the Twentieth Century; it started with the British Cecil Rhodes back in 1877. See this: https://archive.is/syA3F
I will take the time to delve into the article you referenced soon. Since I haven’t read it yet, I cannot comment specifically on its content. However, I am genuinely interested in exploring it further.
I never claimed, nor do historical documents suggest, that the Neoconservative movement originated in the United States. If you were paying close attention to what I said, I referenced Fukuyama, who argued that the Neoconservative movement has its roots in Stalinism and Leninism, later making its way to America through figures like Bill Kristol. In fact, Kristol himself admitted to being a Trotskyite during his college years, and he acknowledged that individuals like him never fully abandoned their political origins.
It is increasingly difficult for me to understand why you seem willing to dismiss a substantial body of scholarship. Your reluctance—or perhaps hesitation—to engage with these issues in a scholarly and rigorous way is concerning.
The reason is that if you don't know when and how and why neoconservatism actually started, then your theory about those things will be false. In your searching to find the origin of a species of tree, you are barking up the wrong tree, which was created long after the species itself already existed.
Zionism is merely the Jewish equivalent of Nazism. They have the same basic Worldview. Both believe that there is only One Truly Good People, One Truly Evil People, and the rest of us, who are expendable in the Cosmic Struggle between the One Truly Good People and the One Truly Evil People. They only disagree upon who are the One Truly Good People and who are the One Truly Evil People. According to Zionism, the One Truly Good People are The Jews and the One Truly Evil People are the Germans. Nazism, only seems strange, because they believe the other way about.
I think I am on to something here. And, Zionism could also be viewed as a brilliant way, for the British, to play the Jews against the Muslims in The Middle East. That, I suspect, was its original purpose. Trump is clearly a Zionist. I seriously doubt that he is of German descent.
But just suppose, for the sake of argument that Donald Trump is of German descent? Perhaps, Hilary Clinton put him up to running against him, merely because he would make her seem good by contrast. His whole purpose is to make German Americans look bad. You see, he is trying to hard to play the Hollywood Nazi! Hilary, of course, hoped that running against him, would jettison her into the White House. The only thing stopping it was Vladimir Putin, and his Russian hackers. Her whole plot was foiled!
"According to Zionism, the One Truly Good People are The Jews and the One Truly Evil People are the Germans."
NOT "the Germans" (who aren't so much as even MENTIONED in the Torah, but the Palestinians, who are mentioned in several lines of the Torah, the first five books of the Christian bible, in which ‘God’ allegedly ordered the Jews to kill nonbelievers in their area and steal their land, such passages as Deuteronomy 7:1-2, 7:16 and 20:15 -18, which have ‘God’ say that when the Israelites enter the promised land (the land that 'God' gave them in Genesis 15:18-21) they are to wipe out the Canaanites, Hittites, Girgishites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, living there. Everyone who believes the Bible believes that the Jews were ordered by God to exterminate the Palestinians.
Could have fooled me! Many Jews, like Goldhagen, are simply obsessed with their hatred of the German people. And, what is the claim that The Holocaust is Uniquely Evil, but a veiled way of saying that the Germans are?
I have been reading Eric's articles for quite some time and have published many of them on Veterans Today. I greatly appreciate his work. However, one thing that continues to surprise me is that Eric has specifically avoided mentioning the neoconservative movement as a Jewish movement in any of his work. To my knowledge, I have not seen an article where Eric directly addresses the issue of Jewish subversive movements. My simple question is: why? Help us unravel this mystery, Eric.
Jonas, I am no more interested in"Jewish subversive movements" than I am in "Christian subversive movements" or "Muslim subversive movements," or etc., because a religion is a category of people who believe in a particular Scripture as being sourced from a 'God' who is All-Powerful and who also believe that Might makes right, and because all such Scriptures are myths that were created and ultimately canonized by the founders of that particular religion, and because all such Scriptures are dangerous and harmful to base an ethic (or morality) upon, and because all such Scriptures that I have studied are loaded with self-contradictions so that any of its believers can pick and choose which of its statements to base his/her morality upon. I am instead interested in the actual structure of power within a given society, and this always has to do with, if the society is an aristocracy, the super-rich controlling the Government, or else, if the society is a theocracy, the top clerics controlling the Government, or else, if the society is a democracy, the majority of the residents being honestly informed and controlling the Government. Since you appear to be obsessed with religion or specifically with Judaism, I would point out to you that even if a person is a resident or even a citizen in a theocracy such as Israel or Iran, that individual might be subversive for democracy, and there is then certainly no reason to do as you do and to include that person in the blame for what that theocracy does. I consider doing so to be an example of bigotry.
Thank you for your response, Eric. I will expand on my thoughts in a future article on Veterans Today. Your comment is intriguing, especially considering that scholars from various disciplines have extensively explored these issues. For example, do you consider Murray Friedman’s study, The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy (Cambridge University Press, 2006), to be obsessive or bigoted? Would you categorize Murray Friedman as part of the so-called bigotry you mentioned?
What about John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt’s The Israel Lobby or Francis Fukuyama’s essay in the New York Times, "After Neoconservatism," where he equates the Neoconservative movement with Stalinism and Leninism? I can cite numerous scholars who have been writing on this topic for over twenty years. It seems quite irresponsible to dismiss their work as bigotry.
My question remains: if I cite these scholars and present evidence demonstrating that the Neoconservative movement is a Jewish intellectual movement that has caused significant problems for the United States, is that genuinely bigotry? Or could it be that you are unwilling to follow the evidence to its logical conclusion?
It is equally irresponsible to characterize my writing as an obsession with Judaism. I have addressed topics such as Zionism, Islam, and other religions, so such a characterization is unfair and inaccurate.
In any case, I plan to delve deeper into these issues in my upcoming article on Veterans Today. I will share the article with you once it is published.
Neoconservatism didn't start with any Americans in the Twentieth Century; it started with the British Cecil Rhodes back in 1877. See this: https://archive.is/syA3F
I will take the time to delve into the article you referenced soon. Since I haven’t read it yet, I cannot comment specifically on its content. However, I am genuinely interested in exploring it further.
I never claimed, nor do historical documents suggest, that the Neoconservative movement originated in the United States. If you were paying close attention to what I said, I referenced Fukuyama, who argued that the Neoconservative movement has its roots in Stalinism and Leninism, later making its way to America through figures like Bill Kristol. In fact, Kristol himself admitted to being a Trotskyite during his college years, and he acknowledged that individuals like him never fully abandoned their political origins.
It is increasingly difficult for me to understand why you seem willing to dismiss a substantial body of scholarship. Your reluctance—or perhaps hesitation—to engage with these issues in a scholarly and rigorous way is concerning.
The reason is that if you don't know when and how and why neoconservatism actually started, then your theory about those things will be false. In your searching to find the origin of a species of tree, you are barking up the wrong tree, which was created long after the species itself already existed.
I have just published the article that I said I was going to write on these issues. You can respond to any point that I make, and I'll be happy to update the article to publish your comments, along with mine: https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2024/11/an-interaction-with-eric-zuesse-on-jewish-subversive-movements/
Zionism is merely the Jewish equivalent of Nazism. They have the same basic Worldview. Both believe that there is only One Truly Good People, One Truly Evil People, and the rest of us, who are expendable in the Cosmic Struggle between the One Truly Good People and the One Truly Evil People. They only disagree upon who are the One Truly Good People and who are the One Truly Evil People. According to Zionism, the One Truly Good People are The Jews and the One Truly Evil People are the Germans. Nazism, only seems strange, because they believe the other way about.
I think I am on to something here. And, Zionism could also be viewed as a brilliant way, for the British, to play the Jews against the Muslims in The Middle East. That, I suspect, was its original purpose. Trump is clearly a Zionist. I seriously doubt that he is of German descent.
But just suppose, for the sake of argument that Donald Trump is of German descent? Perhaps, Hilary Clinton put him up to running against him, merely because he would make her seem good by contrast. His whole purpose is to make German Americans look bad. You see, he is trying to hard to play the Hollywood Nazi! Hilary, of course, hoped that running against him, would jettison her into the White House. The only thing stopping it was Vladimir Putin, and his Russian hackers. Her whole plot was foiled!
"According to Zionism, the One Truly Good People are The Jews and the One Truly Evil People are the Germans."
NOT "the Germans" (who aren't so much as even MENTIONED in the Torah, but the Palestinians, who are mentioned in several lines of the Torah, the first five books of the Christian bible, in which ‘God’ allegedly ordered the Jews to kill nonbelievers in their area and steal their land, such passages as Deuteronomy 7:1-2, 7:16 and 20:15 -18, which have ‘God’ say that when the Israelites enter the promised land (the land that 'God' gave them in Genesis 15:18-21) they are to wipe out the Canaanites, Hittites, Girgishites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, living there. Everyone who believes the Bible believes that the Jews were ordered by God to exterminate the Palestinians.
Could have fooled me! Many Jews, like Goldhagen, are simply obsessed with their hatred of the German people. And, what is the claim that The Holocaust is Uniquely Evil, but a veiled way of saying that the Germans are?
Well, thank you for replying to me, in any event.
And than you for having inspired me to issue the article that I shall today.
It is always interesting to communicate with a genius, such as yourself. You really cut through all the nonsense. What article shall you write?
You'll see it today when it is finished.