July 4, 2013
Hadding Scott and Carolyn Yeager read and comment on Chapter 49, “Jewish Hot-Beds of Bolshevism in the U.S.”
The garment trade in NYC was the perfect line of work for the Jewish revolutionary and agitator, allowing him/her flexibility in working hours by getting paid “by the piece.” Some points made:
- Bolshevism manifested in the U.S. as “predatory unionism” with deliberately planned outbreaks of violence;
- The many Russian and Polish-born Jews managed to change the American character of large segments of NYC;
- All trade unions were not Jewish, but the Jewish unions were exclusively Jewish;
- After WWI, clothing prices increased as much as 200 to 300%, which was blamed on the many strikes;
- Wages in NYC were high, but the kickback to the union bosses could be as much as half your wages, so they were becoming very rich;
- The Hebrew union movement was a part of the New York Kehillah, which was tied to the powerful American Jewish Committee.
Note: We are using the Noontide Press publication of The International Jew — The World’s Foremost Problem which can be found online here as a pdf file.
- 487 views
Comments (1)
Original comments to this program
carolyn
7 Responses
DJF
July 5, 2013 at 11:10 am
Good program, I in particular liked how they talked about how Jews complained about how Jewish immigrants were badly treated but ignored the fact that it was Jewish sweatshop owners who were the ones mistreating them. And everyone ignores the fact that it was American business and workers who were driven out of clothing business because the Jews undercut them on price because of their sweatshop business practice.
And these days in history books and documentaries the Jews will act the victim and blame Whites when in fact it was their own actions that were causing the problems.
Here is a link to a small article at California State University concerning the Triangle Fire in NYC, it acts as though the victims were all “young Jewish girls”, but does not mention that the owners were also Jewish. When something happens and a Jew is hurt, then the Jew is put in prominence, when a Jew is at fault then it is society’s and especially White society’s fault.
http://www.csun.edu/~ghy7463/mw2.html
Markus
July 6, 2013 at 4:28 am
@ DJF,
It’s the same with slavery. As Farrakhan has correctly documented, it was mostly Jews dominating the slave business.
Whites worked their own land and were naturally opposed to slavery, as it undercut the market prices! If 90% of Americans were White in times of slavery, how could each White own a Black slave if they were 10% of the population? Most Whites lived like the Amish still live today: on their farms working their own land without slaves. Yet Whites get the collective blame for slavery by the MSM etc…
Carolyn
July 7, 2013 at 1:20 am
To Markus -
Ashkenazi or Ashkenazim is a Hebrew word – it’s not a German or even an English word. It is Y’hude Ashk’naz in ‘Biblical Hebrew’ or in ‘Ashkenazi Hebrew’ it is Y’hudey Ashknoz — Yhude meaning Jew or the equivalent.
In Hebrew it is not spelled ‘nazi’. This is an important distinction.
According to the Rhineland hypothesis, Jews first arrived in central Europe following the crisis of the 7th century in Byzantine Palestine, and began settling along the Rhine River during the early Middle Ages. Their descendents migrated eastward, forming communities in non German-speaking areas, including Bohemia, Hungary, Poland, Belarus, Lithuania, and eventually Russia, Ukraine, Romania and elsewhere between the 11th and 19th centuries. They took with them Yiddish, a German language influenced by Hebrew and written with the Hebrew alphabet.
As said, this is a hypothesis. Something to wonder about: It is said that Ashkenazi Jews composed only three percent of the world’s Jewish population in the 11th Century, yet at their peak in 1931, they accounted for 92 percent of the world’s Jews. ?? Did they flourish so extravagantly in Europe?
The name Ashkenaz is said to have been first associated with the Scythian region (Central Asia above the Black Sea), then later with the Slavic territories; only later with Northern Europe and Germany because the centers of learning were located there.
Markus
July 7, 2013 at 8:05 am
Hi Carolyn,
yes, I read that as well. Ashkenaz was the father of the White people, and in today’s definition associated with German/Teutonic (etymology: of the people, related by blood).
Togarmah, Ashkenaz’ brother, was the father of the Turcic peoples, including the Khazars.
The Ashkenazi Jews simply associate with Germany (White Arya), yet they are not Ashkenazi themselves. They dwell in European societies and have German names, but they are not “of the people”, but they are Khazarian Jews of Togarmah.
It’s like White African. Does a Boer in South Africa become a Negro because he calls himself White African and possibly takes a Zulu name?
No, nor does an Ashkenazi Jew become a German because he took a German name some 500 years ago or if a Jew speaks a Germanic or any other Aryan language.
Carolyn
July 7, 2013 at 11:23 am
According to who or what? This is just lore. Why do you express it as fact?
Sure, “in today’s definition” Jews want to be associated with Germany. But why were there millions of “Ashkenaz Jews” living in Eastern Europe, especially in Poland most of all, also Ukraine, Romania, Lithuania, and further east in what is known as Slavic country – not Teutonic. See map of 1881 on this Wikipedia page. There were far fewer in Germanic territory. If they started out there, why did they leave?
What perspective are you coming from? From a Christian Identity perspective? Or just whatever you pick up by reading here or there? I wish you would do a better job of making this clear. We should not be dealing with opinion in matters like this.
Markus
July 7, 2013 at 1:20 pm
Before Ashkenazi Jews started out from the Rhine to settle East, they came from Khazaria or elsewhere, while Germans/Ashkenazi lived there much longer and are genetically different from so called Ashkenazi Jews (German Jews).
I am not really CI, but if you go by the Bible’s geneology, then Ashkenaz, son of Gomer is the father of the German(ic) people. German (blood-related, of the people) is just another name for Ashkenazi. And Slavic people are part of the White Aryans language/race family, in which the Jews have operated.
The Teutonic Order State was largely in Balto-Slavic lands, btw, and Germans migrated into Slavic lands as well, especially under Catherine the Great. Germans (Anglo-Saxons) also migrated into America and Australia, does that make them Aborigines? Same is true with the Jew, just because he lives among Ashkenazi, doesn’t make him one.
This is all based on what I’ve read. It’s neither pure citation from other sources, nor exclusively made up or opinion based.
Carolyn
July 7, 2013 at 2:07 pm
You are accepting both the Rhineland hypothesis and the Khazaria hypothesis and saying they are genetically different jews, but all jews. The Rhineland Jews have to be middle-eastern Jews (Semites), while Khazarian Jews would be Turkic-Asian. Does that pan out?
What I am saying is why go by the Bible’s geneology. I don’t. I want evidence.
I know that, but what does that have to do with it?
It is opinion-based because we don’t know what you’ve read, nor do you cite any sources. There is no way to judge what you write here. It’s okay to give your opinion on opinion-type issues but not on fact-type issues, which is how you tend to frame it.