Once in a while is fine; but not all the time. And not in all the institutions.
I mean, for starters, that “air-time” (electronic, print and broadcast) (in our non-Jewish nations) for ethnic minorities who are not the founding peoples of the country, obviously must be more in proportion to their actual presence in the population.
The vehicles for disseminating ideas and culture must be devoted to transmitting and thus imparting to and sharing with one’s own cultural community the world view and manner of one’s own group, one’s own ethnic majority.
Beware of the tell-tale tufts of fur and the Bonnet
I don’t want to be Jewified by local media. I’d to like to be Britannified, if anything. I will also appreciate being Frenchified a bit, because those are my fellow founding peoples, the Quebec local majority. I am half French-Canadian; but I was raised in a household that was a mixture of English-Irish, with a parent who worked for Jews, and to some extent seems to have been Jewified.
There was no community consciousness linking my household to any other households. There was no group identity except in stories my grandparents occasionally told of old England and Ireland. And from this, I now learn that you need a community to transmit culture, and to be dynamic.
The Jews have community; they’re dynamic.
Their community puts on plays, sings and dances. They build local community organizations just for Jews. They build theaters for Jewish plays; they have their own Jewish YMCA; they have Jewish schools (ours have been taken from us to use for multiculturalism — which by the way is Jewish! A Jew invented it, why are we doing it! This isn’t ours; it is not our heritage. Let Jews do it, if they want it. Not us. Maybe Israel will take it up one day.) They have Jewish fund-raising departments which lobby Jewish businesses to contribute. They work at being Jews. We don’t work at being who we are.
In addition, the Jews work at monopolizing public culture, which puts us at an even bigger disadvantage because we don’t work at ours.
That my media and my institutions should largely reflect my cultural group and its interests, should not be open to question; it should be a given.
If my media and institutions do not reflect the interests of my ethnic cultural group, then I have no means to share and perpetuate and develop my own culture. If they excessively reflect someone else’s culture, then my local majority is being colonized.
I liked Star Trek (Shatner was a Montrealer), but I also loved Anne of Avonlea — can’t get more Canadian than that. On the other hand, I hated (and still hate) the Red-Green show (supposedly Canadian; but not at all funny); on the other hand, I really loved the American Beverly Hillbillies, frequently hilarious. While I have read Margaret Atwood, I find her prose and poems as boney as she is. I much prefer the American Southern women writers. (Could it be an underlying essence of the French founding culture of North America that appeals to me in these female scribes?)
On the other hand, Canadian poet Dorothy Livesay is a must on every Canadian shelf; and the complex P.K. Page requires careful study.
I’m just trying to make a point. If members of my own culture do not prominently produce and exhibit material they wish to share, there is no generational pool from which to choose and develop the themes of one’s own heritage.
One feature of Montreal afternoon local tv that finally got on my nerves years ago was a long string of half-hour shows, each hosted by yet another Jewish “expert”. They’re “experts” in everything: psychology, fashion, parking tickets, home decor, the Jews’ll tell ya how to do it, or beat it. In other words, Channel 12 or 6 was not about the local culture of the English-speaking founders of Canada.
I wasn’t savvy to this issue when I was younger. Now, in retrospect I resent being over-exposed to Jewish ideas, even of what constitutes the “Western” intellectual tradition.
As a babe-in-swaddling at university, I was very angry to discover in the most embarrassing way that I had been pumped full of Marxist analytic by my majority Jewish professors who had not identified it as such.
If you are teaching a tradition, identify it and inform your students about the alternatives. Moreover, if you are in a particular state or country, you should teach from the viewpoint of that culture before you offer another angle.
Quebec is a French majority Province; why was the French intellectual contribution to Western civilization excluded from Liberal Arts College at Concordia University when I first attended at the age of 26.
The prevailing English-language educational system should have integrated me into my own ethnic heritage as well as intellectually integrating me into my Province with an understanding of the French-Canadian tradition. I’m pretty sure they have one.
The prevailing Montreal poetry scene was dominated by Jewish writers. There was Abraham Moses Klein; nothing wrong with that, he was a wonderful poet. There was Irving Layton, extremely popular, controversial. And Leonard Cohen.
Frank Scott was out there, and I was fortunate, finally, to read him, and even got to meet him. But he — as the descendant of Canadians who were here at Confederation — and other non-Jewish writers, were, I think, less well known, less popular and less celebrated. There was no cult of Frank Scott; but there was a cult of Irving Layton, who was a wonderful teacher, by the way; I was in his class.
But the Scotts and the Purdys — and whoever the other non-Jewish writers were, I can’t even remember (which will tell you something) — generated no such buzz. My culture, by and for my people, was not popularized. And to some extent, perhaps a large extent, it was a kind of exception to the Jewish rule of domination of the local poetic heritage. No excitement was attached to my literary relatives of the kind that was attached to the culture of Irving Layton and Leonard Cohen. Why?
We need to put energy into celebrating our own people; our own culture.
The problem with being a non-Jew immersed in Jewish poems, Jewish prose, Jewish criticism, is that you also uncritically are absorbing the specifically ethnic Jewish world-view.
You’re being assimilated.
You’re absorbing sympathy for the poor Jewish kid on De Bullion Street who was victimized in Irving Layton’s poems by non-Jewish kids described as “Jew-baiting” gangs.
It doesn’t occur to you that this might be hyperbolae. You set aside the fact that you, yourself, went to non-Jewish schools and were tormented by your fellow non-Jewish students harassing you for wearing eye-glasses, or being too tall. You forget that kids pick on each other, whether it’s the same ethnic group or a different one. That’s what kids do, they pick on each other, they vie for power.
But in a Layton poem, when a kid picks on a kid, and the kid is a non-Jew picking on a Jew, we enter a new universe. The world of propaganda, and of ethnic power. We learn particular sympathy for this kid getting picked on, precisely because he is a Jew.
There is no balance. And therefore, non-Jews indoctrinated in Jewish values, and Jewish politics through over-exposure to the “other”, will lose or perhaps never even acquire, sympathy for their own people and their own culture.
They become assimilated to the world-view of the “other”; they accept as reality the world-view of the “other”, without challenge. At the same time, the “other” will rarely stoop to socially and culturally integrate the Jewish-acculturated non-Jew into his own ethnic group … for fear of assimilation!
I don’t mind having the occasional Jewish professor, but if you’re in my country, teach me history as viewed by my people before you teach me history as viewed by another people.
And this is relevant because Montreal does have a community of Jews, and they do dominate.
One therefore loses one’s important capacity for distancing oneself from the “other” in order to legitimately exercise one’s normal powers of observation and criticism.
There are some people, I think, that they can’t see any other view. They can’t even admit any other view exists. The Jewish view is the view. And therefore, Jews can mass-murder Arabs in the Middle East, but non-Jews don’t appear to have the necessary critical distance to enable them to disagree with that. I’m getting off-course, let me get back.
I am writing here, I am complaining here, about Jewish-dominated news, education, institutions, media and the resulting loss of my own critical distance and distinct cultural identity.
You also — in almost exclusively absorbing the “other” in lieu of your own culture — learn hatred and contempt for yourself.
Irving was a wonderful poet; but he called the local non-Jewish, non-French-Catholic majority, “wasps”, in the most insulting manner. He denigrated non-Jews in many of his poems. It was a cultural thing for him to denigrate non-Jews. That is not good for non-Jews listening to him. Or listening to the cheers of the mostly Jewish audience at the Jewish Public Library, where you have gone to see him.
In one of his poems, Layton described the Catholic churches of Montreal as “hemorrhoids on the city’s anus”.
However, the Churches have been better known by reference to Montreal as the “city of a thousand bells”. I think I prefer that; that’s my culture. But Irving’s culture is to denigrate my culture, which isn’t good for me, or my culture.
If you followed and read and absorbed Layton and his poems and personality, you lost your distance, and you ended up snickering at, if not hating, “white anglo-saxon protestants”, who are the founders of your country, and whose culture is your own.
You ended up rejecting your own roots, with a kind of push-button conditioning, never knowing what it was you were rejecting, or even that you were rejecting it.
You therefore uncritically and automatically reject your own people, culture and heritage because Irving Layton found “wasp” culture and attitudes inferior to his own!
You acquire this automated Jewish world-view without also acquiring the knowledge and capacity, or even the urge, to defend your own from Layton’s bold assertions.
I’m 60 now. I’ve been reading the Debates on Confederation of 1865 for a number of years; and I am discovering my own people.
They are the founders of my country, both French-Canadian and “British” (Scottish, Irish, Welsh and English and all possible mixtures). And I love them. These men are my true ancestors. They are my national, racial and cultural roots and heritage.
I love the long and eloquent, Irish speeches of Thomas D’Arcy-McGee; and the clever dissents of Dorion; and the humour of Taché; the measured persistence of the handsome George-Etienne Cartier. And I very much love Sir John A. Macdonald. These are my people.
This is my country. I want the mentality and intellect of my people as my source; not the dictated mentality of a global UNESCO hodge-podge modeled on the Jewish concept of multiculturalism. A concept by which the founding peoples of their own sovereign nations lose their own roots, and are indoctrinated to — guess what? — appreciate the roots of others, instead!
How “Jewish” can you get? Even when you’re not worshiping the Jews, you’re still doing it. And, now, instead of just the Jews, hundreds of others must benefit from your empathy, who don’t give a rat’s ass about you, your culture, and your country. After all, you’re the one who has to accommodate them. And if you have to accommodate them, your culture can’t be much worth having. Stop making kosher maple syrup! Make French-Canadian maple syrup, and let the Jews salivate at what they are missing!
Back to the Debates.
I adore these literate, generous, sometimes feuding, but very brilliant and quite funny statesmen. They built an amazing country, and they could laugh! They are not at all whatever that nasty-sounding word, “wasp” meant to Irving Layton.
And yet the Jews would love to destroy this history and these roots of mine for Jewish multiculturalsim that parasitizes to death the founding peoples of a nation.
No way! Not my Canada, now that I have found out what it is, and who my people are!
Which brings me to Estelle Levy’s baguette.
Scrolling through google, I chanced upon an article entitled “French idea – restaurant changes law”. It meant French, as in France. I thought I was going to read a story about the wonderful French people, and changes they are making to their culture. I suspected the changes might be caused by their Brussels dictatorship, so I clicked here to read… and what did I find?
http://www.mail.com/int/entertainment/lifestyle/2258090-french-idea-restaurant-changes-law.html#.1258-stage-hero1-6
Why, not a story about the wonderful French founding people of their country, but a story about a Jew, Estelle Levy, who owns a bakery in Paris. The story isn’t really, “restaurant changes law”; but “Jew changes French law”.
A couple of weeks ago, I clicked onto an American web site on a constitutional topic. I was surprised to find the organization founded and entirely run by Jews top-down in all key posts. And 99% of every organization linked to them, likewise. Is that American law? Or American law the way the tiny minority of Jews prefer to have it?
I recently also clicked in to the United Empire Loyalists society of Canada, only to find the President of that is also … a Jew. A book had been funded by the Canada Council some time ago to profile the United Empire Loyalists … in the 8-profile book, one whole profile was devoted to a Jew, although Jews accounted for less than 1% of Canada’s population at the time of the American Revolution in 1776. I wrote to her and asked a question (not related to that) and got no reply. Had I signed with a fake Jewish name, I might have had an answer.
Little Red Meets Wolf
I am reminded of the perhaps all-too-real fairy tale of Little Red Riding Hood. In that story, the rightful occupant of a home arrives to find her forebears have been displaced by others… who are waiting to devour… Little Red herself.
I truly have the eerie impression that my American cousins — the same stock as me: British North American — have been kidnapped, spirited away, devoured and replaced by others using their homes, their constitution, their soil, and that my French ancestors too have been eaten up … perhaps by Estelle Levy flattening them out between slabs of a great big kosher Baguette, Euro-style.
But I get the same impression looking at the current de facto Supreme Court of Canada, where 1/3 of the 9 judges, thanks to Evangelical Zionist Stephen Harper, are Jews. It used to be 4/9 under Zionist Harper — who has apparently lost touch with his own people whom he puts in dog cages at the G20 for the globalists. Is that a Canadian court, or the supreme court of Israel?
Can we not make our own law, and have our own culture any more? Apparently not. Unless, of course, you live in Israel; which you won’t do unless you are a Jew. No foreigners taking over their culture and telling them what to do.
All-points bulletin:
Be on the lookout for tufts of fur in the constitutional bed, and the tell-tale bonnet. Or in this case, the yarmulka.
In belated conclusion, I will always love certain poems of Irving Layton’s (The Bull Calf, for one: it’s non-ethnic, and I can identify with a truly universal idea). But I have cast off my mentality as a culturally exploited, colonized policy agent of Judaism, to become a Canadian.
I now care for the country and the culture and the well-being of my people, top of the list. Because if I don’t, who will.
_____
P.S.: There’s a new banner. Check out the banners page and post and share it!