{"id":241077,"date":"2021-08-20T13:55:01","date_gmt":"2021-08-20T13:55:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=241077"},"modified":"2021-08-22T07:07:05","modified_gmt":"2021-08-22T07:07:05","slug":"critical-race-theory-and-the-jewish-project","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=241077","title":{"rendered":"Critical Race Theory and the Jewish Project"},"content":{"rendered":"

Gilad Atzmon \u2013 gilad.co.uk Aug 20, 2021<\/strong><\/h1>\n

There is a growing debate in the USA about Critical Race Theory (CRT). Peculiarly enough, CRT\u2019s opponents insist that the \u2018Marxist\u2019 discourse must be uprooted from American culture and the education system. I am puzzled by it, as I cannot think of anything more removed from Marx\u2019s thinking than CRT.<\/p>\n

Marx offered an economic analysis based on class division. For Marx, those at the bottom of the class stratum were destined to unite regardless of their race, gender, or sexual orientation. Marx as such was race-blind. However, his vision was unifying as far as at least the working class are concerned. But Critical Race Theory aims in the complete opposite direction. CRT\u2019s advocates believe that people are and should be defined politically by their biology: by their skin colour, often by their gender and\/or sexual orientation. CRT attempts to fight racism, not by eliminating it but actually elevating biological determinism into a constant battleground.<\/p>\n

Critical race theorists aren\u2019t too original on that biological determinist front. Already in the late 19th century, Zionism called the Jews to identify politically with their biology. Hitler\u2019s call for the Aryan people to do the same happened about two decades later. Ironically, even the so-called Jewish \u2018anti\u2019 racists within the \u2018Jews only\u2019 anti-Zionist political cells (such as JVP, JVL, IJAN) follow the exact Zionist and Hitlerian agenda. They also insist on identifying politically and ideologically as \u2018a race.\u2019*<\/p>\n

One may wonder at this stage why people within the conservative right refer to CRT as \u2018Marxist\u2019 despite it having nothing to do with Marx and having much to do (ideologically) with Zionism and Hitlerian biologism. One option is that people within the American Right believe that the reference to Marx communicates well with their supporting crowd. Another slightly less genuine option is that Marx is a code name for a \u2018subversive Jew-related discourse.\u2019 The American conservative universe is largely inspired by Israeli nationalism, however it is disgusted by Soros-type cosmopolitan interventionism. The American Right may be using codified language to tackle its own paralysis. It clearly struggles to call a spade a spade.<\/p>\n

Considering the above it is fascinating to examine the Jewish American take on the CRT debate.<\/p>\n

Last month Jewish Historian Henry Abramson<\/a> used the Jewish Telegraphic Agency platform to inform us that \u201canyone teaching the past by skipping over the unpleasant parts isn\u2019t teaching history. They are engaged in propaganda.\u201d This firm statement took me by surprise. Like Abramson I oppose all forms of memory laws that restrict the free historical discussion. Yet, Jewish institutions are invested heavily in policing the historical debate. They often castigate as Holocaust Deniers everyone who dares to question the primacy of Jewish suffering or even offer a slightly unorthodox vision of WWII. The Jewish intellectual tradition isn\u2019t famous for its list of historical texts either, quite the opposite. There is a complete lack of Judaic historical texts in between Flavius Josephus (AD37-AD100) and Heinrich Graetz (1817-1891). The rabbinical universe has tended to skip the historical tradition because the Talmud and Torah are there to determine the manner in which Jews react to the universe around them. Israeli historian Shlomo Sand has pointed out that the Jews and Zionists in particular largely invent their past to fit with their political, existential, and spiritual interests. Maybe it shouldn\u2019t be down to Jewish institutions to preach how to discuss the past.<\/p>\n

Abramson is upset by the fact that in \u201cnearly two dozen states, the movement to impose restrictions on the teaching of history is gaining momentum.\u201d Abramson is also upset by the new Polish memory law and Putin dictating a vision of the Holodomor. Maybe before I delve into Abramson\u2019s concern, I should mention that using Google search, I didn\u2019t manage to find any opposition made by Abramson to the Israeli Nakba Law that similarly restricts the discussion on the Israeli 1948 ethnic cleansing crime.<\/p>\n

Abramson claims that opponents of CRT attempt to avoid the discussion over the \u201ccontroversial and painful moments in America\u2019s history.\u201d I am not sure that this is the case. I am not sure that America can or even intends to deny its problematic abusive past, but I do know that every black academic who attempted to discuss the role of Jews in the African slave trade has witnessed hell breaking loose. I highly recommend Abramson and everyone else read Prof. Tony Martin\u2019s spectacular The Jewish Onslaught<\/a> , a reportage of an orchestrated and abusive Jewish institutional campaign against a Black scholar who didn\u2019t follow the script and tried to examine what was the role of some Jews in the African Slave Trade.<\/p>\n

Watch Prof. Tony Martin: https:\/\/youtu.be\/QdPF2RcSxE8<\/a><\/p>\n