Simply brilliant! The key to understanding Icker-Tee

The blogger of  ‘Augean Stables’ has written this most illuminating article (below) on how certain Jews believe themselves to be superior for opposing their own community.

We’re excerpting portions of his article and adding the word ‘Chinese’ alongside ‘Jews’. We think the exposition by this ‘Augean Stables’ blogger  on the psychology behind ‘Theobald Jews’ can similarly help explain the behaviour of one Malaysian confused columnist who despises his own skin pigments.

_________________________________________________________________

Excerpt below from Not ‘self’-hating Jews, but Jewish scourges of Jews

Many of [these Chinese] seem singularly focused on being seen as a “progressive”. And, as the progressive movement has moved further and further away from identification with Israel/Chineseness – and, to some degree, further away from identification with Jews/the Chinese race as such – the need to be seen as progressive (“righteous”) in the eyes of others, has taken precedence over the seemingly parochial desire to identify with, and defend, their own community.

I have thought long and hard about the phenomenon of Jews/Chinese who oppose their own community, have read and written about it, and there appears to be four dynamics worth exploring:

1. Moral Vanity

I was particularly inspired by Anthony Julius’s long two-part essay published at the American Jewish Committee site, Z Word. The piece was called Jewish anti-Zionism Unravelled: The Morality of Vanity. (Pt. 1 & Pt. 2). Julius also rejects the notion of such Jews as being “self-hating”. Instead he refers to them as moralisers who continually desire affirmation from the non-Jewish/non-Chinese world as to their righteousness.

    The moraliser makes judgments on others, and profits by so doing; he puts himself on the right side of the fence. Moralising provides the moraliser with recognition of his own existence and confirmation of his own value. A moraliser has a good conscience and is satisfied by his own self-righteousness . He is not a self-hater; he is enfolded in self-admiration. He is in step with the best opinion.

In his book, Trials of the Diaspora, Julius calls them “scourges,” a term I prefer because it relates to their self-anointed role as prophets, whipping the wayward Jewish people into line.

2. The Temptation of Innocence

Ruth Wisse, in her book Jews and Power, identified the tendency of some Jews/Chinese to vociferously oppose their own community as a dynamic which she, in part, attributes to a Jewish/Chinese uneasiness with the projection political power and a tendency to almost fetishize the Jews’/Chinese history of powerlessness. Wisse concludes that Jews/Chinese who endured, or know the history of, the powerlessness of exile are in danger of mistaking it for a requirement of Jewish life or, worse, for a Jewish ideal.

This puerile desire not to be corrupted by the complexities, and occasional compromises, necessitated by possessing moral agency is described by Pascal Bruckner as “The Temptation of Innocence.”

3. Jewish Fear: Assimilation and Altruism as an Inoculation from Harm

[historically] Jews/Chinese were attacked for allegedly having too much power, even when they had little or none, the emphasis was on being eager to make concessions, not to gain victories through threat or pressure.

…How would this strategy try to succeed? By proving Jews/Chinese were good citizens, by showing they were unselfish and sought nothing for themselves, by demonstrating their willingness to dissolve the bonds and customs of their own community…and by showing that being nice to them would benefit everyone or almost everyone. In other words, altruism was a central element in the strategy

More recently, Barry Rubin, director of the GLORIA Center (Global Research on International Affairs), in an illuminating and penetrating piece, entitled “Explaining Jewish Political Behavior“, said:

    “…A key element of the assimilationist doctrine has been to deny there was a [Jewish/Chinese] collective communal interest, and to avoid making collective demands.

Rubin, who, it should be noted, fleshes out his argument more fully in his book, Assimilation and Its Discontents, continues:

large parts of the Jewish/Chinese elite are proud to stand aloof from their own people and deem it virtuous to abandon it and reject any notion of communal interests (including Israel and religion). Indeed, they think they can best prove their credentials by championing the causes of other groups even–sometimes especially–those in conflict with Jewish/Chinese interests.…The elite Jew’s/Chinese’s emphasis is often to escape identification with the community, proving he is a cosmopolitan with a universalist identity, being the first to demand the dissolution of any community loyalty and viewing the embodiment of Jewish peoplehood—Israel—as an impediment to those goals. While anti-semites charge that all or almost all Jews/Chinese in positions of power pursue a distinctively Jewish/Chinese interest, the exact opposite is the truth. This explains how left-wing Jews/Chinese extol multiculturalism and self-determination for other peoples even as they hold the exact opposite attitude toward their own people, whom they are determined to show are not their own people.

…many Jews/Chinese, particularly in elite positions, are eager to prove their credentials by criticizing their own people or Israel.

4. The Adversarial Jew: Skepticism and relativism disguised as reasoned political thought

I think there’s one last dynamic at play – an insight I came upon as a result of an email exchange I had with my 16-year-old nephew recently. … Julius, in his Z Word essay, dissected the potential moral pathos of many such renegade Jews: (or Chinese)

    He holds that the truth is to be arrived at by inverting the “us = good” and “other = bad” binarism. He finds virtue in opposing his own community; he takes the other point of view. He writes counter-histories of his own people. It is not enough for him to disagree, or even refute; he must expose the worst bad faith, the most ignoble motives, the grossest crimes. He must discredit.

It’s a simple lesson perhaps, but a vital one. And, its wisdom that many of the Jews who write for the Guardian, quite shamefully, don’t even meagerly possess.

As Anthony Julius put it so pungently, “they’re proud to be ashamed to be Jewish/Chinese.” Honor-Shame culture turned on its head. And when hooked up with Arab scapegoating gives us the toxic marriage of pre-modern sadism and post-modern masochism.

World, beware Jews/Chinese who bears the gifts of loathing their own people. Nothing good can come of it, for Jews or for the other nations.

Source: Augean Stables

_________________________________________________________________

The paragraphs in bold red have been highlighted by Hartal MSM for emphasis. Again, we acknowledge that we added the word ‘Chinese’ in blue in their instances throughout the write-up which we’ve taken the liberty to reproduce above.

Comments
9 Responses to “Simply brilliant! The key to understanding Icker-Tee”
  1. Peter Masry says:

    SYABAS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  2. gunse0097 says:

    why are you equating chinese and jews ?? There are no similarities.

    Jews and Chinese in real life are not fond or like each other. For some reason you have become a jew lover. I have nothing against them. If these articles written by caucasians or Indians, i can believe. Moslems and chinese are not cpmpatible with the Jews.

    • Peter Masry says:

      “why are you equating chinese and jews ?? There are no similarities.

      Jews and Chinese in real life are not fond or like each other. For some reason you have become a jew lover. I have nothing against them. If these articles written by caucasians or Indians, i can believe. Moslems and chinese are not cpmpatible with the Jews…”
      ===============================================================
      We can conclude two things from this illiterate screed:

      1. Caucasians and Indians love Jews but the writer doesn’t (he has nothing against them la..
      but doesn’t like ‘Jew Lovers’…)
      2. The writer never had a Jewish girlfriend
      3. The writer never had a Chinese girlfriend
      4. The writer has never visited New York City
      5. He probably gets excited reading Bernama publications (or Harakah)

      • Peter Masry says:

        “why are you equating chinese and jews ?? There are no similarities.

        Jews and Chinese in real life are not fond or like each other. For some reason you have become a jew lover. I have nothing against them. If these articles written by caucasians or Indians, i can believe. Moslems and chinese are not cpmpatible with the Jews…”
        ===============================================================
        We can conclude FIVE (sorry) things from this illiterate screed:

        1. Caucasians and Indians love Jews but the writer doesn’t (he has nothing against them la..
        but doesn’t like ‘Jew Lovers’…)
        2. The writer never had a Jewish girlfriend
        3. The writer never had a Chinese girlfriend
        4. The writer has never visited New York City
        5. He probably gets excited reading Bernama publications (or Harakah)

  3. telur dua says:

    Hmm……..this could well be Icker’s sickness.

    But I am of the opinion that Tee is afflicted with the Stockholm Syndrome. During his student days his mind was ‘held captive’ by BTN. No doubt they did a good job on him. Over time he sympathised with his ‘captors’ and finally decided to be one of them.

    This explains the venom he spews.

  4. casper says:

    gunse, there are in fact many similarities beyond the book and ethnicity.

    Not too long ago, on channel 521 Astro, there was a 5 part production “Jews in America” that got canned, two weeks(Pt 2) into the showing. We can only surmise, the hidden hand was late in reviewing what’s on the telly these day, but can they did.

    The story board gives the most accurate portrayal of late 1890’s-1930’s Jewish migrants to the land of liberty. In essence, there were two waves – the privilege/monied Jews and later mass migrants of Jews from Europe – that would call America home.

    What’s amazing, is the dexterity of the people who have gone on to find riches beyond comprehension, one would be hard press to acknowledge in just one, two generation, this select people of the book would one day leave their mark, and a profound influence onto others, whether we realise it or not.

    Dirt poor, discriminated from the mainstream, poorly educated(in terms of English) and left to their own devices, their numbers have thrive and with time, their scions, very productive members of any sphere they choose to involve/indulge in.

    That ring a bell gunse? If not, may I suggest a change of reading material beyond the norm. Regards nonetheless gunse, hartalmsm and all.

  5. casper says:

    And before I forget gunse – Jews and Chinese not compatible, I must beg to differ.

    For one, I dated a girl from a non-observant Chicago family for almost 2 semesters, once upon a time and if you must know. when Hitler was going ape shit all over Europe, there weren’t any nation who would relocate the Jewish people – entire families plus house pet – who could afford passage but boat loads ended up in Shanghai(imagine that) subsequently, when nobody would offered(came) to help.

    Just a little trivia knowledge for your benefit gunse.

  6. rlandes says:

    tho i’d like to take responsibility for the “brilliant analysis” at my blog, i cannot. it is the work of Adam Levick at CiFWatch (a very impt blog that tracks moral insanity at the Guardian).
    i’m fascinated by the parallel you suggest. i’m quite sure that this kind of pressure to conform to an “ecumenical” or “cosmopolitan” identity is very powerful.
    i think it shd be resisted gently but firmly by a sense of proper boundaries. of course we want to go beyond “my side right or wrong”, but we don’t want to fall into “their side right or wrong” either. part of real autonomy – personal as well as cultural/national – is being able to both be open to “the other” and still have a sense of “self”.
    my sense is that the most important possible alliance for the sake of civil polities and a “just, peaceful, and verdant world” is the emergence of a balanced relationship btw cosmopolitan and ethnic, btw selfless and self(ish).
    as rabbi hillel put it, “if i am not for me, who will be; if i am only for me, who am i?”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: