ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2019 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, June 25, 2019

Hazony dons the nationalist skinsuit

It's beyond obvious that Yoram Hazony is attempting to create a new gatekeeping outpost in between civic nationalism and genuine nationalism, but he's not anywhere nearly smart enough to do so effectively. His posited distinction between "nationalism" and "racialism" is not only absurd, it is very, very easily exploded.
Yoram Hazony
I think it's as clear as daylight. I wrote a book drawing parallels between Jewish-Israeli nationalism and American, British, and other nationalisms, and arguing for their legitimacy. The book rejects racialism across the boards. All you need to do is to read it.

Yoram Hazony
But my opposition to mixing nationalism with race theories has been explicit every step of the way. It's explicit in the conference announcement and on the website. You don't have to agree with me. Still, it takes some nerve to pretend I've been anything but open about this.
I read Hazony's book. Unlike many on the nationalist Right, I saw through him immediately and pointed out that his "National Conservative" conference was an obvious attempt to set up yet another neoclown gatekeeping organization, this one focused on nationalists. Hazony's further attempts to "defend his ideas" readily reveal him to be not only a gatekeeper, but a shameless liar of the Ben Shapiro variety for two very obvious reasons.

First, to the extent there is any distinction between two terms that have historically been used in a synonymous manner, nation is a subset of race. Necessarily. So to base an argument on the idea that nation is actually a broader category than race is worse than dishonest, it is deeply stupid. It's a total nonstarter.

Second, the etymology of nation makes it obvious that racialism is, and always will be, an element of nationalism.

1250–1300; Middle English < Latin nātiōn- (stem of nātiō) birth, tribe, equivalent to nāt(us) (past participle of nāscī to be born) + -iōn- -ion

One's nationality derives from one's birth, not one's geographical location or paperwork. It is an identification based on DNA, blood, and family, not ideology, confession, documents, or current location in the space-time continuum. By appealing to the fact of adoption, Hazony is stupidly attempting to derive a rule from its occasional exception.


UPDATE: Hazony is also a true son of his father:
Yoram Hazony@yhazony
Sorry, there is no such thing as “genetically Jewish.” Jews are a nation, not a race. Anyone on earth can join the Jewish people, as Ruth the Moabite did—by accepting our people as her people, and our God as her God.Yoram Hazony added,

owen cyclops@owenbroadcast
so atheist jews, who reject your god, arent jews then?

Yoram Hazony@yhazony
Atheist Jews remain Jews. We were talking about non-Jews who want to join the Jewish people and what’s involved.

Labels: ,

72 Comments:

Blogger Brett baker June 25, 2019 9:08 AM  

Well, maybe people will end up going around the gatekeepers to true nationalism?

Blogger nbfdmd June 25, 2019 9:12 AM  

God, I hate these civnat virtue signallers.

@1: The smart people eventually get there. Unfortunately, it probably takes a minimum IQ of 120-130 to be able to reason your way passed them.

Blogger Sherlock June 25, 2019 9:20 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger nbfdmd June 25, 2019 9:28 AM  

I was also AnCap. AnCap as an ideology only lasts until your first time walking down the street in a big city and seeing a gaggle of violent nuffins or fuzzies. You suddenly get "woke" to reality.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 25, 2019 9:30 AM  

Tucker is on time and on target:

https://summit.news/2019/06/25/tucker-same-people-pushing-for-war-want-to-open-our-borders-to-migrants-from-middle-east/

Blogger Damelon Brinn June 25, 2019 9:33 AM  

Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't he bringing race into it as soon as he uses the term "Jewish-Israeli"?

Blogger Maximoushka June 25, 2019 9:39 AM  

Don't underestimate their talent of Solipsism. By that term, they mean a wide range of races if it needed to be. Jewish people from every nation designated as Israeli. Isn't that awfully diverse to you?

Blogger Harambe June 25, 2019 9:43 AM  

Yoram Hazony is such a strong Anglo-Saxon name

Blogger Maorio June 25, 2019 9:53 AM  

even with regards to adoption, I'm skeptical (this is purely anecdotal) a friend of mine is adopted from SE asia, he can usually keep that from being too noticeable but it does show that he is not the "same" as the other "kids in the class".

Blogger Cary June 25, 2019 9:54 AM  

They are definitely trying to undermine the meaning of nationalist. Dennis Prager has a new column out lying about it.

But even after he denies that it has anything to do with ethnicity, he turns to the analogy of the family at the end.

https://www.amgreatness.com/2019/06/24/clarity-about-nationalism/

Blogger Stilicho June 25, 2019 9:58 AM  

The civnat nonsense usually has an appeal in Christian countries because of the supra-national, confessional nature of Christianity to which the civnats draw false comparisons with nationality. Churchians are particularly susceptible. You don't generally see this in non-Christian nations. Where you Don it is because of a secular religion that holds to some sort of confessional membership (international socialism), but it tends to be fairly weak due to the inherently false nature of secular religions. There is an element of it in Muslim nations, but it is weak due to strong tribal bonds (see, e.g. pan-arabism, Persian international influence through Shia islam, etc.).

Blogger Sherlock June 25, 2019 10:13 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Daniel June 25, 2019 10:14 AM  

DNAtionalism is the only nationalism. Everything else is Babel.

Blogger David Ray Milton June 25, 2019 10:18 AM  

Yes. And the examples that he pulls from the Bible (Naomi and Ruth, I believe) in his book to demonstrate that nation does not equal race, though somewhat valid, are not even remotely relevant to the modern world and mass migration. A handful of migrants and refugees can, of course, be assimilated both genetically and culturally into a larger nation. Millions of them, however, cannot be.

Furthermore, I thought his examples were cherry picking data. He could have given a more balanced biblical view had he mentioned all of the evil religious and cultural practices that were brought in by Solomon’s (and other king’s) foreign wives.

Blogger Mystic On Main June 25, 2019 10:21 AM  

I guess the question is can America (or France, Germany, Iceland, Russia, Algeria, Israel) operate successfully as a country first and a nation second or third or fourth? As with everything, the answer to this question depends on one's definition of "successfully".

Blogger anorganicbear June 25, 2019 10:24 AM  

@6: He's probably using the Schroedinger's jew paradox. A jew is neither a race nor a religion until you determine which one would be problematic.

Blogger cloom June 25, 2019 10:30 AM  

I hang out in the video comments of civnats and post links to here and books, and I show the holes in their arguments using their own observations, and how begging the foreigners to join them, back to old Canada, is not effective. One proof is foreigners are at their protests, not your protests.

Civnats believe assimilation stopped working because of Trudeau, and if only Trudeau is gone then assimilation will happen again, ignoring the numbers of immigrants crossed a threshold where feigned assimilation ended; teeter-totter tilted.

Last night a civnat argument got 11 thumbs up, and my counter argument got zero, which is typical. That is how I measure these, my allies, who correctly see the problem, but misidentify it.

Blogger sammibandit June 25, 2019 10:36 AM  

VD, did he address where Angles and Saxons come from or is he perhaps like so many of his kind and completely scared of Germans?

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother June 25, 2019 10:39 AM  

Using Naomi and Ruth as examples of immigration is total snake oil.

Blogger Barbarossa June 25, 2019 10:39 AM  

@4 I had an MBA class where the professor was touting the virtues of creative destruction (can't remember the exact buzzword term he used, but it was very much akin to notions of Anarchic Capitalism). He used the time-worn example of the brick through the window of the baker's shop. After he was done citing the synergistic energy unleashed by that window replacement that provided employment to the glass manufacturer and the window installer and allowed the baker to refresh the look of his shop, I asked, "And how many bricks through that window does it take before the baker closes shop and moves elsewhere?" Oh, was that poorly received, but not nearly as poorly received then when I concluded the argument with the killshot: "Have you ever been to Detroit?"

Blogger sammibandit June 25, 2019 10:47 AM  

I can guarantee you the glassman would rather do fine Tiffany lamps than fix-ups. Shame that the Chinese started making cheap ersatz Tiffany lamps making domestic repair and manufacture irrelevant. These bozos never stop to think about what the tradesman would rather focus on.

Blogger Beardy Bear June 25, 2019 10:49 AM  

Even an average man, given time to ponder, can reach the same conclusion as a midwit. The waters of truth will flow over all gates in time.

Blogger Damelon Brinn June 25, 2019 10:51 AM  

@20, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that a professor used that fallacy. I would have pointed out that the net gain to the community of that economic activity was minus one window, but your Detroit reference cut to the core much better.

Blogger Beardy Bear June 25, 2019 10:53 AM  

Haha this is clever I love it.

Blogger Arthur Isaac June 25, 2019 11:05 AM  

Schroedinger's Jew. He's whatever he needs to be in order to justify calling you a fascist antisem. If he bothers with justification at all. Oh by the way you're deplatformed and that can't mean that their is a monopoly on media/social media.

Blogger HouellebecqGurl June 25, 2019 11:14 AM  

I wonder if he knows the number of local chicken and weave shops that fled from Furgeson and Baltimore after the fellas robbed & torched them because some good boi dindus got killed by cops? That'd make an interesting study.
If you want to make leftists unhappy, whenever they whine about places like Detroit being "food deserts," ask them how long should an owner be forced to stay in business, after years of stolen T bones and broken windows weekly?

Blogger HouellebecqGurl June 25, 2019 11:17 AM  

Guess what, ya'll? Everybody's favorite Pajeet death cultist Neocon is back, and she's trying to meddle in Judge Roy Moore's election run in Alabama.
Nikki Haley makes me so irrationally angry, I have to do breathing exercises after hearing her speak.

Blogger FUBARwest June 25, 2019 11:27 AM  

Every...Single...Time...

Blogger peacefulposter June 25, 2019 11:34 AM  

"Immigration is cool as long as it's done LEEEEEgally."

No.

Blogger KPKinSunnyPhiladelphia June 25, 2019 11:44 AM  

Should we expect ideological purity from Hazony? Let's not be naive.

One the one hand, he and his spouse are working overtime to ensure his tribe's posterity, what with their nine kids. He's taking personal responsibility for "an identification based on DNA, blood, and family."

One the other hand he's got nine kids and, hey, a guy's gotta grab the punditry dough while he can with all those mouths to feed and send, presumably, to Princeton, the loving couple's alma mater.

Oh well. If he makes the term "nationalism" respectable that's progress of a sort.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 25, 2019 11:48 AM  

HouellebecqGurl wrote:Everybody's favorite Pajeet death cultist Neocon is back,
Haley is a Presbyterian. Her parents are Sikhs. They need to go back.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 25, 2019 11:49 AM  

KPKinSunnyPhiladelphia wrote:Oh well. If he makes the term "nationalism" respectable that's progress of a sort.
he's not trying to make it respectable. He's trying to make it meaningless.

Blogger xevious2030 June 25, 2019 11:59 AM  

Damelon Brinn, there were three categories of “Jew,” which were commonly used. At least that were understood as such until DNA tests.

One is a person who is the descendant of Abraham (by Rebecca), through the mother (common use does not limit it as only through the tribe of Judah). The second is a person that becomes Jewish through religious conversion, and through the female line, that is Jewish by religion, but not a descendant of Abraham. The third is a descendant of a convert, through the female line, that is not Jewish by religion. Excluded are any offspring of a male that is not Jewish by religion, and who themselves do not convert to being Jewish by religion.

See the trick, how it is not strictly by bloodline, and not strictly by religion, as a refutation of an absolute claim that it is exclusively a religion or exclusively is a race?

Blogger peacefulposter June 25, 2019 12:03 PM  

Big noses are genetic.

Blogger Stilicho June 25, 2019 12:06 PM  

@barbarossa: that you had an MBA program professor dumb and ignorant enough to A) embrace the broken window fallacy (he never heard of Bastiat obviously), and B) cite it as an example of creative destruction is depressing. MPAI of course, but you don't usually expect an IQ of 85 from a university professor.

Blogger VFM #7634 June 25, 2019 12:09 PM  

"Immigration is cool as long as it's done LEEEEEgally."

Me, as a kid in the '90s:

"Top 20 countries: Mexico, China, India, Dominican Republic, Korea, Jamaica, Cuba, Haiti, El Salvador... well, Poland's there, I suppose... wait, how is legal immigration any better than illegal immigration??"

Blogger Winston Smith June 25, 2019 12:15 PM  

It is an identification based on DNA, blood, and family

Historically, there were a few ways to claim legitimate membership in the tribe:

1. Be born into the tribe to one or two parents who were full members of the tribe.
2. Be accepted by tribal authorities as an adopted member who had earned their place through legitimate, proven loyalty.
3. Marry a member of the tribe.
4. Be adopted by members of the tribe as a child.

Nothing about Jus Soli gives you legitimate membership in the tribe. Being born in proximity is simply not sufficient.

That said, one area where the "racialists" are generally wrong is that the tribe has no right to disinherit someone from membership in the tribe because they are of mixed blood or were adopted in accordance with custom and law. That sets a dangerous precedent wherein the ancient rights of inheritance and familial authority are altered or abolished based on modern theories.

Blogger Barbarossa June 25, 2019 12:34 PM  

@35 The man was definitely not stupid, but that's the curse of academia, where one begins to imagine one's ideas take precedence over reality. I shouldn't say academia. I saw the same damn thing in Iraq and Afghanistan as well. "If we could only get them to accept the separation of church and state." If only I had wings.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 25, 2019 12:35 PM  

Winston Smith wrote:That said, one area where the "racialists" are generally wrong is that the tribe has no right to disinherit someone from membership in the tribe because they are of mixed blood or were adopted in accordance with custom and law.
This is where you're wrong.

Blogger Sherlock June 25, 2019 12:57 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Solon June 25, 2019 2:26 PM  

"That said, one area where the "racialists" are generally wrong is that the tribe has no right to disinherit someone from membership in the tribe because they are of mixed blood or were adopted in accordance with custom and law."

Absolutely false. Or did you think that, because a Mexican immigrated LEEEEEGALY and settled in Pennsylvania, that he is suddenly a White Appalachian? Does his marrying a White Appalachian girl make him part of the White Appalachian tribe by default, and thus the White Appalachians can't just "disinherit" him?

More likely, the White Appalachians would kick him out along with their errant daughter, if he caused any trouble. And their children definitely wouldn't be White Appalachians by default either, they'd be mestizos, and STILL not a part of the tribe.

You clearly don't understand the first thing about nationalism.

Blogger Duke Norfolk June 25, 2019 3:40 PM  

He's trying to steal the identity of Nationalist the same way (((they))) stole the identity of Israelite. They're shameless, manipulative liars.

Blogger Winston Smith June 25, 2019 3:45 PM  

No, it's a lot of you that don't understand what a nation is. A nation is an extend family. Adoption, marriage and reproduction are how families are formed and expand.

It is generally unwise to adopt a child of a different race. Miscegenation is usually selfish and short-sighted. Neither are good patterns for people to adopt and should be discouraged.

A mixed race child born to a member of the nation has the same right of inheritance as a full-blooded one. These rights are not social constructs, they flow from familial structure and parental bonds and authority.

Blogger Robert Pinkerton June 25, 2019 4:21 PM  

It appears to me that the desire is to place political citizenship above considerations of ethnic origin, on a basis of commonalty of interest. Unfortunately, MPAI, some downright atavistic about it.

Blogger Don't Call Me Len June 25, 2019 5:07 PM  

A mixed race child born to a member of the nation has the same right of inheritance as a full-blooded one.

Other than "because I say so", what is this notion based upon? "Half breeds" being outcasts has been a "tribal" feature throughout the ages. What you're proposing is nothing more than a slightly rephrased civic nationalism,, mixed with atomic individualism, "I adopted him so that makes him part of our tribe and the rest of the tribe has nothing to say about it!"

Blogger tublecane June 25, 2019 5:13 PM  

"he's not anywhere nearly smart enough to do so effectively"

If he were smart, he'd start by changing his name.

By the way, I happened to be watching a video that had some audio playing in the background recently. Either a book-on-tape or a podcast; I dunno. It was some leftist talking about white nationalism as oxymoronic because "white" is too recent a concept to have any real significance.

German nationalism and Japanese nationalism, in the other hand, were at least valid concepts because of those people's shared heritage. Even though the voice was clearly disgusted by them, presumably because fascism.

Point is, even braindead lefties with axes to grind staring down fake enemies are slicker than some dweeb denying all connection between race and nation. If you wanna be slick, be slicker than a hipster.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 25, 2019 5:17 PM  

Winston Smith wrote:A mixed race child born to a member of the nation has the same right of inheritance as a full-blooded one. These rights are not social constructs, they flow from familial structure and parental bonds and authority.
THIS IS NOT ABOUT YOU

Blogger Dave Dave June 25, 2019 5:18 PM  

I was born in Australia to a German father. I have always considered myself German, and I am accepted there by my distant family. I have always been drawn to the German environment, as opposed to the Australian one. To suggest that nationality has nothing to do either heritage is absurd. Learning about our heritage helps us understand our place in the world. Most people I know that are aware of their heritage have a strong connection to it.

Blogger tublecane June 25, 2019 5:20 PM  

@4- Anarcho-capitalism always brought to my mind visions of at best outlaw territory in the Old West. More likely, it'd be gang warfare. With warlords fighting eachother for control and everyone in debt bondage.

The NAP I haven't encountered much, frankly. Probably because I got my libertarian doses from books rather than real live people. But I have run into people who at least pretend to prefer Mad Max World to contemporary society. They tend to have more integrity than NAP drones.

Blogger Dave Dave June 25, 2019 5:21 PM  

@tublecane Yoram Hazony consequently shall be known as Jonah Americastein. A true American if ever I saw one.

Blogger Winston Smith June 25, 2019 5:46 PM  

Other than "because I say so", what is this notion based upon?

The fact that the child is literally blood related to the rest of the tribe.

"Half breeds" being outcasts has been a "tribal" feature throughout the ages.

That varies wildly by tribe. Ironically, the Jews are themselves a highly adulterated "pure race" (according to them). Jesus's own bloodline has gentile blood in it.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT YOU

No shit, sherlock.

Though ironically enough, I am "not American" by the standards some of you are using because about a quarter of my ancestors came here after the founding. Sure, 75% of my bloodline can trace itself back to English and Scottish colonists, but I am a "quarter-breed" thanks to my French and Danish ancestors that came a good deal later.

Of course, that's just rubbish because if someone who can claim to be a son of the revolution on both sides of his family isn't American then who is? This is the sort of nonsense that happens when you make blood alone the hill on which nationalism dies.

Nations are large tribes. Tribes are very large extended families. Get a truly large extended family together at a reunion and you will have a lot of people that are so unrelated by blood that they can legally marry.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 25, 2019 6:09 PM  

@Winston,
Blood is not the hill on which nationalism dies. Blood and nationalism are two sides of the same coin.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 25, 2019 6:10 PM  

Anti-Racism is the hill on which nationalism will die, if you civic-nationalists get your way.

Blogger Dave Dave June 25, 2019 6:18 PM  

If you look into the meaning of racism, you find racial discrimination. Of course, as we know, discrimination is distinguishing between multiple things. Racial is necessarily the acceptance that races are different, which is part of nationalism. You cannot be a race-blind nationalist.

Blogger James Fox Higgins June 25, 2019 6:55 PM  

I am a Jew because I love bagels and Yahweh. Luckily, if I ever change my mind about Yahweh, the love of bagels will keep me Jewish. See, being Jewish is easy and fun! 🤪

Blogger Don't Call Me Len June 25, 2019 7:01 PM  

The fact that the child is literally blood related to the rest of the tribe.

And blood related to a foreign tribe or tribes. Which takes precedence?

That varies wildly by tribe.

But you admit it exists, so "A mixed race child born to a member of the nation has the same right of inheritance as a full-blooded one" is not in fact a incontrovertible truth.

Blogger VD June 25, 2019 7:18 PM  

This is the sort of nonsense that happens when you make blood alone the hill on which nationalism dies.

You clearly doesn't understand the concept of "necessary but not sufficient". Nationalism isn't limited to blood, but it requires it. Language and religion also play a part.

Though ironically enough, I am "not American" by the standards some of you are using because about a quarter of my ancestors came here after the founding.

You also don't understand irony. Furthermore, neither DNA nor nationality are binary. Nations are not species.

Blogger tublecane June 25, 2019 7:30 PM  

@51- The hill to die on analogy I don't like in this instance, since it is usually opponents of nationalism who choose to assault the inheritance stronghold. You could as easily set up traps with language, culture, religion, territory, whatever you want. But you choose blood.

That one's a favorite because it's the most emotional. Somehow people spontaneously form visions of gas chambers in the back of their minds whenever the subject comes up.

Blogger Winston Smith June 25, 2019 8:05 PM  

You clearly doesn't understand the concept of "necessary but not sufficient". Nationalism isn't limited to blood, but it requires it. Language and religion also play a part.

No, I actually do. Your commenters said this was wrong:

That said, one area where the "racialists" are generally wrong is that the tribe has no right to disinherit someone from membership in the tribe because they are of mixed blood

Perhaps they misinterpreted that as saying that blood is all that matters, but I think my point is rather clear that I am saying "no, you cannot kick out someone simply because they had one 'wrong' parent."

Blogger tublecane June 25, 2019 8:33 PM  

@59- "you cannot kick out someone simply because they had one 'wrong' parent"

Why not? People come up with all manner of standards for belonging.

In Ancient Athens, I believe, citizenship was recognized on the basis of one's father AND maternal grandfather having been citizens. That's just a f'rinstance

Reading old American anti-slavery literature, I find often they're talking not about the souls of colored folk as a whole, but paying special attention to those with varying fractions of white blood. Uncle Tom's Cabin plays heavily on this theme. Then there are stories of pretty girls who appear white who are discovered to be quadroons, or whatever, Shanghai'd into slavery. Like Band of Angels or Showboat.

Point being, white audiences responded to this fiction with interest proportionate to the amount of intermixture in the blood of the characters they could identify with. Which was always changing, granted. And it had a lot to do with appearance, obviously.

This was no mere distinction of national belonging, mind you. It was a matter of whether or not the person could be held in bondage. Oftentimes the distinctions were very fine, though usually it was a matter of sentiment.

Either way, if they could argue octaroon versus quadroon and so forth, nations certainly can puzzle out half-breeds.

Blogger VD June 25, 2019 8:42 PM  

I think my point is rather clear that I am saying "no, you cannot kick out someone simply because they had one 'wrong' parent."

Your point is completely wrong. People can, will, and have done whatever they decided to do. There are even published research papers observing that in times of great societal stress in multicultural families, the half-breeds tend to get killed by both sides.

Your opinion is totally irrelevant.

Blogger sammibandit June 25, 2019 9:05 PM  

Metis children used to live inside fur trading forts with their FN mothers here in the prairies precisely because it was dangerous otherwise to do so.

Blogger CM June 25, 2019 9:33 PM  

There are three examples of attempting to graft in a foreigner to a nation in the bible.

Hagar and Ishmael were shoved out.

Rahab professed faith in the God of Israel and then betrayed her own people. As a traitor, she had no competing nation.

Ruth cut all ties to whatever existed of her family.

Those requirements are harsh and not normal. They are increasingly more difficult to maintain in a world that really already has limited sovereignty of nations, with the UN, extradition, post-war thinking (multiple allegiances), and technology.

If a nation should "adopt" into it, then it absolutely deserves the right to exile, as well. You can't have one without the other. Inclusion without exclusion is destructive. Exclusion without inclusion, as well.

Nations are all about free association - the people decide who belongs and who doesn't.

Blogger Winston Smith June 25, 2019 10:00 PM  

Your point is completely wrong.

Vox, I have read you for about 15 years. I know damn well you are smart enough to know I was making a moral statement and not at all suggesting people cannot do evil if that is what they wish to do.

Nations are all about free association - the people decide who belongs and who doesn't.

That is, in practice, very dangerously related to Magic Dirt. Civic nationalists freely associate with non-Americans and determine in their minds they're Americans because they believe they have the power to designate you American because their will is superior to the reality before them.

Blogger mike June 25, 2019 10:51 PM  

That may be, however in this reality, pure nationalism would be a totalitarian regime. There is nothing pure in this world and will never be , thats why people need to use both their hearts and their brains. If you overdose one or the other you are fucked

Blogger Ty Richards June 26, 2019 2:02 AM  

He and others like Prager and Shapiro are constantly redefining nation and race and religion to suit their neocon agenda. A lot like the (((leftists))) they hate. Owen summed it up well tonight - War Jews vs Sodomy Jews. We are caught up in a not-so-secret war between religious and atheist Jews who happen to run our congress, media, academia, entertainment, military, finance and economy. The inversion is coming from every angle. It’s been interesting to realize all of this.

Blogger CM June 26, 2019 8:25 AM  

That is, in practice, very dangerously related to Magic Dirt. Civic nationalists freely associate with non-Americans and determine in their minds they're Americans because they believe they have the power to designate you American because their will is superior to the reality before them.

"Magic Dirt" is nothing like what I described. You aren't adopted in based on the notion that adoption changes you (magic dirt). You are adopted in based on already demonstrated loyalty to one people at the exclusion of your own. That doesn't assume change after inclusion.

Exclusion absolutely is not magic dirt. Magic dirt believes someone already included necessarily comes with the morals and values and loyalties of the nation.

Some people do not, even when born in. They undermine their people, betray their people, or shun their people. Just because they are born in doesn't mean they stay in when their own actions show them to not consider their nation as their people.

People are born into nations by virtue of blood alone, but by rejection and betrayal, remove themselves from their nation (Rahab and Ruth).

Some people can be adopted into a nation, but not before they have proven themselves loyal. <- this is self-limiting. Hundreds of thousands of people per year doing this is laughable. Expect someone like that in small handfuls every generation.

All of this is Christian theology.

Blogger CM June 26, 2019 8:47 AM  

Historically, nations splinter and reform. It isn't linear. In that, I'd agree with Hazony.

When it comes to Race (as skin color), it automatically makes someone an outsider. Albinos are not treated as "one of the tribe" - they are either treated as devils or gods. So color seems to be a pre-requisite - you need to look enough like the people around you to even get to the step of inclusion.

I also think tribalism is different from nationalism. It is further reaching than the tribe, but not excessively so. Definitionally, its looser than strict blood ties, but it absolutely requires bonds and loyalties stronger than simple loyalty to a common governing force.

I might have been from German and English stock at some point in my ancestry, but I am necessarily outside those nations. They would not recognize me as English or German (and I wouldn't,either), so I am not a member of their nations, regardless of blood. Most of us could say the same.

We are not really Americans, either. The empire is rejecting us and we don't recognize many of our countrymen as one of us, either. Realigning into new nations may involve cutting off blood ties (my cousins are NY elitists and I'm a southerner), which would appear to mean that blood only gets you so far in the forming and keeping of nations.

Blogger Damelon Brinn June 26, 2019 9:29 AM  

Ruth cut all ties to whatever existed of her family.

Something that's basically impossible today when even "refugees" get off the boat with a smartphone. Thanks to modern technology, they will always have a lifeline back to their home nation and language, so they don't even need a ghetto to avoid assimilation.

Blogger Winston Smith June 26, 2019 9:31 AM  

@CM

I was referring to adoption of children, nothing more. Adopted children have the same right of inheritance as children born to their parents. Part of that inheritance is passing on the ethnicity/nationality unless the child rejects their inheritance.

Blogger CM June 26, 2019 12:37 PM  

Pretty much. It's why it should be more rare today than it wasn't then, if not non-existent.

Blogger CM June 26, 2019 12:42 PM  

Part of that inheritance is passing on the ethnicity/nationality unless the child rejects their inheritance.

Part of rejecting their inheritance is trying to hold on to their biological ties as well as their adopted ties.

A nation has every right to reject that even if one of their members adopted that into their family. And if that family refuses to cut the adoptee loose when they fail to cling to the family, then the nation should expel them, too.

This is why, historically, adoption typically occurs within families, villages, tribes, and nations - they were not typically transnational until relatively recently.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts