By Dr. Patrick Slattery — A writer at Veterans Today wrote an excellent article that confirmed all the main points make by Dr. David Duke over the past month in his various radio shows and articles regarding Nikki Minaj and the Jewish domination of the hiphop music industry. The writer, Jonas E. Alexis, cites a number of African American scholars who condemn the celebration of drugs, violence, and misogyny that is so endemic in rap and point out that this is a relatively recent phenomenon in black music. He then goes on to quote extensively from Jewish writers like Nathan Abrams who catalog the Jewish domination of the music publishing industry dating back to the late 1800s.
Throughout the article Alexis keeps invoking Dr. Duke’s name as he confirms point after point. But… the title of the article is “David Duke’s Cardinal and Metaphysical Blunder,” and eventually one is left wondering what is left of Dr. Duke’s critique that could constitute such a blunder. Eventually, almost 4000 words into what is otherwise a stellar article, we find it:
So far, Duke has been right in line with rational and historical thought by saying that the media has been controlled by “Jewish Supremacism.” However, upon close inspection, his position is morally and intellectually weighed and found wanting because it lacks metaphysical ground and backbone.
We have already mentioned that he does seem to believe that there is a “racial basis for Judaism,” an argument that has been challenged numerous times.
But for the sake of argument, let us grant that premise for a moment. Let us assume that it is true. What does that actually mean? What will that eventually prove?
Well, it logically means that David Duke is indirectly arguing for the Jewish establishment in Israel because the Jews were there long before the Palestinians; it means that David Duke is in agreement with Jewish intellectuals like Sam Harris; it means that the “Jews” have every moral right to land on Palestinian bodies and crush them; it means that Duke’s videos with respect to Zionism (though they are very much helpful in disseminating information) are ultimately supporting the Jewish cause.
Moreover, if the idea that there is a “racial basis for Judaism” is true, then Duke is indirectly in agreement with Rabbi Ido Elba, who declared that
“If every single cell in a Jewish body entails divinity, and is thus part of God, then every strand of DNA is a part of God. Therefore, something is special about Jewish DNA…”[35]
But Duke does not agree with the rabbi and repudiated similar claims in his videos! If Duke cannot see the logical outworking of his own weltanschauung and realize that it leads to metaphysical deadness, then this is his chance to elucidate for his readers the contradictory nature of his views.
This is a complete muddling of both Dr. Duke’s views and the logical results from them. Yes, Dr. Duke cites the numerous genetic studies that show that, at least on the patrilinael side, Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews are much more closely related to each other and to Middle Eastern populations in Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria then they are to the European populations amongst whom they dwell. So there is a Jewish ethnicity, or at least a few closely related Jewish ethnicities, that can trace a good deal if not the bulk of their ancestry to the Middle East and the Hebrews of antiquity.
And of course it is well known that, with the exception of those who undergo relatively rare conversion rituals, membership in the Jewish religion is based on birth as opposed to faith. But even if you want to call this a “racial basis for Judaism,” how does Alexis get from there to his assertion that this would mean Jews have “every moral right to land on Palestinian bodies and crush them?” How many people around the world are living in the same lands they (among many other peoples before and after) were two or three thousand years ago? The European tribal ancestors of the Irish were on Great Britain. The ancestors of the British tribes were in central and northern Europe. The ancestors of the Japanese were in Korea. The ancestors of the Zulus were in central Africa. Yet none of them would stake a claim on that ancestral homeland of millennial past.
Furthermore, there is absolutely nothing in international law that would lend any support to Jews or any other group reconquering a long lost homeland. So Mr. Alexis’s contention that Dr. Duke’s acknowledgement of a genetic connection between various Jewish groups around the world and the other Semitic peoples in and around Palestine today “means that the ‘Jews’ have every moral right to land on Palestinian bodies and crush them” is absolutely unsustainable against every principle of human rights. No person would dare say that because a group lived somewhere two thousands years ago they would have the right to come in and steal the land and terrorize, murder, torture and ethnic cleanse the inhabitants who lived there.
In fact, such a contention would be more consistent with the now unsupportable view that the European Jews who founded Israel were actually the decendants of Turkic speaking Khazars. This was a theory popularized by the Jewish writer Arthur Koestler that gained currency among many anti-Zionist Christians who maintain a strong emotional attachment to the Hebrews of the bible and do not want to think of today’s Jews as being their biological heirs.
Very much to the contrary of Mr. Alexis’s assertion that logically “David Duke is indirectly arguing for the Jewish establishment in Israel because the Jews were there long before the Palestinians,” it is in fact the contention that Jews have no right to Israel because their forefathers were from elsewhere that is dangerous, because it implies Jews would have a right to Israel if they were descended from the Hebrews. This is a bargain basement pricetag for a land deed that no other ethnic group is offered. In fact, it is a very dangerous argument, for if scientific genetic studies show (and they overwhelmingly do) clear genetic evidence that the Jews of today are related (though certainly different in many areas) then the good and well meaning author has put himself in a box.
The other completely mistaken conclusion that Mr. Alexis reaches is that because Dr. Duke considers genetics a contributing factor to behavior, then the only remedy for the bad behavior of the group Mr. Alexis refers to as “The Dreadful Few” would be genocide. Nothing could be further from the truth.
While it may be politically incorrect to mention a possible genetic basis to group behavior, it is certainly a scientific fact that genetics impacts behavior (think of the instinctive behavior of animals, for instance), and it is also uncontroversial that different ethnic groups have different distributions of a variety of genetic traits. Evolutionary psychology shows that genetics as well as the epigenetics, how the underlying genes and the environmental impact on their turning on and off, has a huge role in behavior.
So if it turns out that Jews have a higher genetic propensity for ethnocentrism than most other groups, does that mean that they have to be annihilated? How ridiculous! Anthropologists could point to dozens of tribes around the world, from the Amazon to New Guinea, that believe they are the only true humans. The Eskimos call themselves Inuit, which means “the people,” and they are hardly the only group that refers to themselves with such a moniker.
If one has a genetic propensity to alcoholism, he should avoid alcohol and never turn on those genes. If one has a genetic bias for weight gain it makes sense to watch your diet. There is nothing wrong with a healthy love for your people and wanting to preserve their character, but there is something wrong with than extreme ethnocentrism that teaches the other 99.7 of humanity are anti-Semitic enemies.
What differentiates the Jewish view of themselves as the Chosen People from that of these other tribes is that, while the rest of the world does not buy into Eskimo creation myths, fully half the world’s population adheres to religions that descend from Judaism. Jewish ethnocentrism is dangerous not so much because of its inherent nature, but rather because of the cultural environment of that ethnocentrism. It has been brought to a fever pitch by Judaism, Zionism, and many other forms of ethnic supremacism. Gentiles have usually (with some obvious periods of exception) been extremely permissive about Jewish ethnocentrism as the Jewish creation stories form the foundation of both Christianity and Islam.
So the way to deal with Jewish ethnocentrism or any other form of undesirable group behavior, whether it has a genetic or cultural basis, is not to single them out for harsh treatment, but rather to treat them as we treat everyone else, which is certainly NOT the case in the world today. Look around. The most powerful countries in the world give a card blanche to Israel to violate any international norm of behavior. Speak honestly of Jewish power in the United States and you lose your job. Do the same in Europe and you land in jail. It also makes good sense and good morality for the non-Jews of the world to protect their own rights and freedoms and even existence when they are under attack by an organized Jewry that seeks to control the media, politics, and finance of not just the United States but the world.
Dr. Duke reiterates ad ad nauseam that violence against the problem of Jewish supremacism would be above all morally unthinkable, not to mention completely ineffective.
Mr. Alexis’s defense of Dr. Duke’s position on hiphop was powerful and very much welcome. It is unfortunate that such an astute and eloquent writer and good researcher would then so thoroughly misunderstand the essense of Dr. Duke’s larger philosophy regarding the overall issue of Jewish supremacism.
