Source: Bigstock

Enough with Gaza. I’ve done three columns in a row on Oygenflaygin vs. Akbar, and that’s plenty. If there’s one thing I despise about opinion columnists, it’s the fetish of covering the daily “big thing.”

So this week’s column will be an in-depth examination of why the “Angels of Death” episode of the 1970s British TV series The New Avengers demonstrates how showrunner Brian Clemens lost the thread that made the original series, especially the Emma Peel seasons, so iconic.

Okay, let’s dive in. There’s this health farm staffed by stunning but deadly nurses and run by traitorous double agent Coldstream, and…

Wait…hold the phone…Counter-Currents just ran a critique of my Gaza pieces. Sorry, but like an unspent gay man, I gotta re-butt.

Still, this column won’t really be about Gaza.

Because if you’ve read them carefully, none of my Gaza pieces have actually been about Gaza. They’ve been about the American right.

Just ’tween us, I don’t give a shit about the Middle East. That my middle name is Christopher should suggest the extent to which my family was not just secular but unconcerned with Judaism. I find Israelis shady and abrasive and I find Akbars backward and intolerant. That Abrahamic sand trap is not my concern. The U.S. is my concern, and the sorry state of the right is my concern. The sorry state of the left is not my concern, because it’s good that the left’s in a sorry state.

What smarts is how the right, with its manias and morons, seems hell-bent on not exploiting the left’s sorry state.

To be clear, I like Counter-Currents; Greg Johnson’s never been anything but kind to me. But several of his writers haven’t emerged unsoiled after picking a fight with me (see here). This newest piece, by “Spencer Quinn” (not sure if that’s a pseudonym), can be read here.

Quinn agrees with me in principle that Palestinians have no more right to slaughter innocents in order to reclaim “thar lah-yund” than do the Injuns. But he declares that while it would be wrong to cheer the slaughter of whites in the name of reclaiming “stollen land,” it’s different with Israel, because “these are Jews we are talking about, and that changes everything.” Sure, in normal times, in other circumstances, brown people murdering lighter-skilled folks in a futile attempt to reclaim land lost ages ago should be condemned. But as Jews are the global enemy of whites, this time—this one time—let’s cheer the brownies! Let’s cheer the rape of lighter-skinned women by darker-skinned savages.

Take that, George Soros!

After all, Quinn continues, “Jews as a group” “overturned segregation in the United States.”

“Without Jews,” he states, “we would still be arguing over how to better implement ‘separate but equal’ in Negro schools.”

Yes, if not for “the Jews,” 2023 America would still have “separate but equal” as official policy.

That’s a unique kind of stupid.

I’m not replying to Quinn because I care what he thinks, or because I assume any of you care what he thinks. I’m rebutting because it’s exactly this kind of reality detachment that’s sinking the right. And it’s a very particular type of detachment, in which undeniable but unexciting matters are spiffed up into fantastical fairy tales. Like yes, the Democrats did exploit Covid to make voting easier for their most reliable constituents, and no, Republicans (with Trump as president) neither fought hard enough against it nor took advantage of it once it became inevitable. But that’s too pedestrian for today’s adventure-seeking rightists, so the story gets jazzed up as “homicidal Venezuelan voting machines hacked the election.”

Yes, there are definite reasons to not want the vax or the boosters; no, the vax isn’t microchipping you with the mark of Satan.

Quinn takes the undeniable truth that Jews have always leaned heavily into left-wing politics—and, as a high-IQ well-heeled people skilled in law and the media, they have made a significant contribution to leftism—but in his ham-hands it becomes “Without Jews blacks never would’ve wanted to end Jim Crow and no whites would’ve ever offered to help them do so.”

Quinn seemingly agrees with Ibram Kendi that all whites want to see blacks re-enslaved. There are no white “allies” and never were. Quakers? Never heard of ’em!

The black desire for full equality was organic. Yes, Jews helped, but they didn’t create the urge. Whites helped too. Sometimes for altruistic reasons, sometimes for mercenary ones. Quinn seems ignorant of how white Republicans pandered for black votes during Reconstruction. In the 20th century, the roles reversed and white Democrats did the pandering. Only in a mind as limited as Quinn’s could millions of voters exist in this country without either party trying to manipulate them for an advantage.

As for Quinn’s claim that Jews “use blacks” as a cudgel against whites, non-Jewish whites started doing that fully on their own during and after the Civil War. Using blacks against whites is hardly a uniquely Jewish plan, and denial of that truth is based on ignorance of history, and the bizarre white supremacist belief that every time white fought white it was only because “the Jews” made ’em!

“Whites never harm whites,” say the imbeciles whose white-power orgs always dissolve thanks to infighting.

Putting those things together, the fact that black desire for full equality under the law was inevitable, and both whites and Jews have, at different times, manipulated blacks for gain, the notion that without Jews America would still have whites-only bathrooms becomes a near parody of what a dumb white character in a Netflix show would say.

To repeat a theme from previous columns, American whites got spoiled by the Injuns, a nonwhite people who were totally dominated and then crawled away like lambs, to live among us unobtrusively. That was the exception. Whites got lucky. In most other white adventures in supremacy, from slavery and Jim Crow to African colonialism, there was a bill that was always bound to come due. It started to come due in the post-WWII era, and Jews or no Jews, that was destined to happen.

The reality detachment of saying “Jews are the on/off switch; get rid of them and all the bad things cease” reflects a larger rightist desire for simple answers to complex matters (“Reinstall Trump! Attack the Capitol!”). This mindset has done nothing for the right but breed losses.

Quinn demonstrates why far-rightists sound like Farrakhan the moment they discuss slavery. “Da JOOS dun give us da slavery!” To push a simplistic blame-the-Jews philosophy, you must first infantilize whites and absolve them of agency. You must also bury history, like the Reconstruction documents in which whites foolishly assumed they could easily manage the problem they created because blacks are themselves so infantile they could be controlled in perpetuity.

Yes, George Soros is a monster. But Soros aside, the post-WWII trajectory in Western and Northern Europe (and Canada) has been one of increased leniency for criminals. Unlike Japan or Singapore, when white Western nations get fat and prosperous, mushy-headed liberalism tends to follow. “Let’s cure criminality.” “Let’s help oppressed Third Worlders.” Put the average educated white liberal in a comfortable society, he’ll get bored by the lack of struggle. So he’ll either import trouble or invent it (“I think I’ll don a dress and become a new victim group just so I can have something to fight for!”).

The point being, it ain’t just Jews; whites are very receptive to this nonsense. Jews are better at it from a managerial standpoint, but to think that without Jews America would still be 1950 in race relations is idiotic.

Quinn’s piece has a lot of padding, but there’s one more point he makes that should be addressed, because of its big-picture implications. Regarding my recent columns slamming far-rightists for embracing the Palestinian cause alongside the worst, most dysgenic elements on U.S. college campuses, Quinn states that “the dissident Right can root for the Palestinians all it wants, but we all know it will have no tangible impact other than annoying David Cole.”

Now we see Quinn infantilizing himself! “Aw shucks, I don’t got no influence no-how!” That’s the ridiculousness of the “dissident right.” On one hand they’ll say, “We’re winning! Our message is seeping into the mainstream!” only to switch, when convenient, to “Whatever we do don’t make no dern tangible impact at all.”

They take away white agency in general (“whites are powerless; only Jews impact history”), and their own specific agency, when it suits them.

I certainly don’t think the “dissident right” can affect the outcome in the Middle East, but I’m looking closer to home. As mentioned earlier, what should be an era of nonstop wins for the right considering the batshit insanity of leftist positions (positions that alienate the white working class, which can still tilt an election) and the weakness of the Democrat bench (to the point where a stroke victim is currently outshining his colleagues) has turned into a nightmare of losses because the right’s hobbled by an unprecedented list of manias that are poison with independent voters: “stollen election,” relitigation of 2020, an obsession to rehabilitate J6, a failed volatile ex-president slinging mud at every Republican who doesn’t bow before him, QAnon lunatics, a “youth wing” made up of actual Nazis, and an insistence on abortion bans even in the face of nonstop pro-life defeats.

Why on earth would you want to add one more unpopular position to that litany of toxins? The American public is very pro-Israel regarding the Gaza war. A whopping 80 percent of non-college-educated white men support Israel’s actions against Hamas. In other words, the voter base to which the GOP must appeal feels one way, so of course the tards on the far-right say, “Let’s go the other way!”

And Biden’s response to the Israel/Gaza conflict—slamming Americans for their “Islamophobia” rather than playing up the fact that Americans are being held hostage—could ding him in swing states next year (it wouldn’t be the first time an Akbar hostage crisis sank a Democrat president’s reelection).

The smart move for Republicans? See the polls and ding the bastard.

The far-right’s brilliant alternative? “Let’s join the Squad and be to Biden’s far-left on Israel!”

“Don’t fight Hamas, fight Jews!”

Genius.

So go ahead, add yet another strike against you. From the river to the sea, no more wins for the GOP.

Mind you, this stupidity is a logical extension for people who deny election realities, be it Trump’s 2020 loss or the existence of swing voters. Once you get mired in that brain cloud, it’s easy to think that cheering Hamas and booing tha Jews “will have no tangible impact other than annoying David Cole.”

Okay, that’s it. I’m done with Israel/Gaza for a while.

So anyway, why would Clemens reveal that Coldstream is the mastermind in the very first scene when the entire episode revolves around…

Oh dammit, out of space! Well, maybe next week.