Anti-Imperialism & Anti-Humanist Rhetoric of Gilad Atzmon

[Ben D]

Citation, please.

I read a hard copy of the Protocols loaned to me through a Theosophical connection I had at the Brisbane lodge back in the early 90s. Just now, I did a search online for a copy to refresh my memory and the so called Protocols that came up don't appear to be the same as my memory recalls. I could be mistaken, but I suspect these are not the genuine article, they seem so transparent as to the agenda of creating a hate campaign against Jews, and thus find it hard to imagine this is what I had read. I will however, when opportunity and time permits, attempt to borrow the hard copy I had read previously to confirm one way or the other.

The prescience to which I was primarily thinking of based on my memory was a plan to weaken the targeted gentile nations by first destroying the cohesion of the family unit whose strength existed due to their general sincere belief in and compliance with Christian moral standards. They would do this by first acquiring control over the media, and then promote sexual self indulgence as being natural, and thus in time bring about the lowering the traditional Christian/cultural moral standards. Hence, the resulting large scale promiscuity, children being born out of wedlock, sexual deviation, easy divorce, etc., would eventually transform the existing coherent national culture made of strong family units based on a common Christian morality, to a mass of loose family arrangements comprising self indulgent individuals who thus could be manipulated by the media controllers much like animals.

Being an oldie, I have lived long enough to witness the transformation of my nation along the lines of the description above.

Please note that i'm not judging the changes as good or bad, just noting the unfolding transformation of this nation from the perspective of this soul.

Fair enough. As I said, there are a lot of versions of it. And even the standard edition does kind of suggest something like it. But may I humbly submit that by the late 19th-/early 20th-century in France and Russia, you wouldn't have really had to be prescient to know that a general statement of intentions along those lines would speak to then-prevalent fears of social decay, arising from then-recent and/or contemporary events?

I mean, the entire thing continually returns to gloating over what a destructive influence modern, liberal social policies are having on the masses who are too stupid to know that aristocratic despots such as the tsar were the only thing saving them from the kind of chaos created by the French Revolution. (IOW -- The text isn't prescient in anticipating, let's say, the rise of the United States as an international power on a par with what were then the great powers of Europe, or anything like that. Its predictions (such as they are) are all about things that already would have been more or less within the scope of the average person's imagination at the time.)

Yes correct, I wasn't talking about prescience of historical events, but rather the prescience of a MO and general strategy for accomplishing the takeover of world (virtual control of the mass of humanity's perceptual reality) that I have witnessed in the here and now in the latter part of the 20th century and continues as we speak. You say that ...these predictions (such as they are) are all about things that already would have been more or less within the scope of the average person's imagination at the time, but I really can't imagine that to be the case. I grant you that some may, but not the average person. The point is that someone or some organization created the document we know as the Protocols in the late 19th century, and I claim I see clearly the evidence of that general MO/strategy in play in the transformation of the Australian national culture over my lifetime in the 20th century and beyond.

So it follows that to my mind, the past and ongoing actual manifestation of the plan in the context of which I'm aware, requires intelligent powers behind the scenes who are responsible for it.

Btw, I'm glad to hear you''ve been thinking about and researching stuff on it recently, as you have already confirmed my suspicions that there were a number of non-authentic versions around to muddy the already cloudy waters.

[eyeno]

My (unofficial) name for this thread is:

"With Friends like these, who needs enemies?"...

I'm not laughing at ya brother, i'm laughing with ya...seriously...somehow I feel strangely kin to you. We are all wrapped up in this together are we not?

We all gotta do what we gotta do. The gator pool is getting deeper though right? Its getting harder and harder isn't it? Its gonna get harder and harder too but ya already know that. Put your hard hat on.

I don't know what to tell you, I really don't. But I'd love to know what you could tell me, if ya know what i'm thumpin on...

[DrVolin]

You say that ...these predictions (such as they are) are all about things that already would have been more or less within the scope of the average person's imagination at the time, but I really can't imagine that to be the case.

Not only was it well within the imagination of the average person, these concerns permeated the social fabric in the late 19th century Europe and North America. Concern over the breakdown of the family and its effects, to take only one example, underlay both the eugenics movement and the growth of early Sociology. With increasing urbanization, and with the increasing distance between subsistance and small scale farming, the traditional agrarian constraints on marriage were relaxed. Since newly urbanized peasants no longer depended for their subsistence on access to land, inheritance through legitimate kinship was suddenly devalued, since the capacity for labour, now the main commodity, was inherent in the individual. This allowed individuals to make decisions they would not have made before, such as divorcing and remarrying. This in turn challenged the power of the institutions that traditionally granted the rights related to marriage, kinship, and inheritance, such as the church and landed aristocracy, but also village and family elders.

The above fears are consistently discussed as part of the British and continental reactions to the French revolution as early as the late 18th century, and gather momentum through the industrial revolution and its attendant urbanization. They become the core of the reaction to socialism after the troubles of the late 1840s. We are still living through these transformations and we can notice change in social structure through our lifetime, but earlier stages of the same changes were very visible and the focus of intense popular discussion, political debate, and academic study at the time of the writing(s) of the Protocols. There is no evidence of prescience here.

[slimmouse]

My (unofficial) name for this thread is:

"With Friends like these, who needs enemies?"...

Under the AD vision of how to proceed, from the best of what I can deduce, out of the potentially billions of activists against Zionism and ending the Fed and ending non stop Wars based on lies, I can see a venn diagram containing about 3 people.

And Ill bet any money you like that would also be infiltrated.

[American Dream]

My (unofficial) name for this thread is:

"With Friends like these, who needs enemies?"...

Under the AD vision of how to proceed, from the best of what I can deduce, out of the potentially billions of activists against Zionism and ending the Fed and ending non stop Wars based on lies, I can see a venn diagram containing about 3 people.

Wise activists like slim know from their experience running winning campaigns for positive social change, that we need all the supporters we can get!








.

[slimmouse]

Surely, there arent enough billions of people in that photo for you AD ?

[Searcher08]

My (unofficial) name for this thread is:

"With Friends like these, who needs enemies?"...

Under the AD vision of how to proceed, from the best of what I can deduce, out of the potentially billions of activists against Zionism and ending the Fed and ending non stop Wars based on lies, I can see a venn diagram containing about 3 people.

And Ill bet any money you like that would also be infiltrated.

(John) Venn is problematic as he was from a multi-generational elite Christian Victorian evangelist tradition and a tireless advocate for Gonville and Gaius College, Cambridge University.



end of tease...

Anyway, maybe a useful question to ask here (of AD in particular)
AD, given when you actually asked how many active activists there were here at R.I. and the response consisted of....


My understanding is that you have been involved in Palestinian solidarity for a long time.
What has been your personal experience of infiltration into these groups from err 'PTB' sources and from the far right?

[barracuda]

I don't give a damn what you think barracuda.

That's a shame. I don't return your sentiment - on the contrary, I'm adamantly interested in what you're thinking. I just can't for the life of me figure out what it is.

The original Jewish thought, from a few thousand years ago, in the times of Jesus, did not include the philosophy of the Protocols. It did not include poisoning the well. Nuff said?

No...

That would be scary close to Christianity would it not? Nuff said?

...and no again. Sorry, I can't read between the lines here. You remind me a bit of a girlfriend I had in high school who didn't really want to talk much, but rather liked to gaze soulfully into my eyes, yet got angry because I couldn't anticipate her desires.

Sometimes I wonder why the mods don't reign you in.

Please.

We don't need Talmud quotes up in here. Or do we?

That would be marvelous. I had no idea we had a Talmudic scholar on the forum. And it would have the added atttraction of being marginally on topic. I insist.

[Searcher08]

My BaffleOMeter is now at:

[compared2what?]

Where in the fuck did Jesus come from? Hello people? Damn it........Ignorance is rampant..........

Atzmon is fond of asserting that he was killed by Jews in a typical fit of violent Jew vengeance.

I didn't mean to be combative or excessively last-word-having. I think I just misunderstood you. For some reason, I thought you were asking where the discussion of Jesus was coming from. So that's the question I answered.

But I don't really know why I thought that last night, when it's perfectly clear to me today that you were actually just saying that Jesus was born a Jew. Which, of course, is the case.

Please accept my apologies for having appeared to be simply looking for ways to fight with you, if the latter reading is correct. I really wasn't posting out of antagonism. I was just confused.

Sometimes I wonder why the mods don't reign you in. We don't need Talmud quotes up in here. Or do we? We could, but it would shut this place down. You need to learn when enough is enough. Ya know? You undo and reverse everything you seek to do. All a person has do do is reverse this thought stream. Have you ever thought about that? Sometimes far enough is far enough.

I have handed the olive branch many times. When will you be smart enough to take it?

I appreciate it. And I hope we can continue amiably to stumble forward in the general direction of mutual and mutually enhanced understanding, bumps in the road notwithstanding.

[compared2what?]

Yes correct, I wasn't talking about prescience of historical events, but rather the prescience of a MO and general strategy for accomplishing the takeover of world (virtual control of the mass of humanity's perceptual reality) that I have witnessed in the here and now in the latter part of the 20th century and continues as we speak. You say that ...these predictions (such as they are) are all about things that already would have been more or less within the scope of the average person's imagination at the time, but I really can't imagine that to be the case. I grant you that some may, but not the average person. The point is that someone or some organization created the document we know as the Protocols in the late 19th century, and I claim I see clearly the evidence of that general MO/strategy in play in the transformation of the Australian national culture over my lifetime in the 20th century and beyond.

So it follows that to my mind, the past and ongoing actual manifestation of the plan in the context of which I'm aware, requires intelligent powers behind the scenes who are responsible for it.

What DrVolin said goes for all of the content and rhetoric in The Protocols -- ie, the stuff that's said about the press, education, industry, taxes, all of it. That was already what people were talking about. And it was also already how they talked about it. Those were already the terms of public debate, in short.

Btw, I'm glad to hear you''ve been thinking about and researching stuff on it recently, as you have already confirmed my suspicions that there were a number of non-authentic versions around to muddy the already cloudy waters.

There isn't an authentic version. It was always very extreme and reactionary right-wing propaganda.

[brainpanhandler]

Sometimes I wonder why the mods don't reign you in.

Ha. Yah, she does rule.

[eyeno]

I didn't mean to be combative or excessively last-word-having. I think I just misunderstood you. For some reason, I thought you were asking where the discussion of Jesus was coming from. So that's the question I answered.

But I don't really know why I thought that last night, when it's perfectly clear to me today that you were actually just saying that Jesus was born a Jew. Which, of course, is the case.

Please accept my apologies for having appeared to be simply looking for ways to fight with you, if the latter reading is correct. I really wasn't posting out of antagonism. I was just confused.

Yes. Now you understand what I meant.

[compared2what?]

Thanks.

It occurs to me that I should state plainly and in so many words that Netanyahu's recent invocation of the Holocaust in connection with Iran is a good example of why I regret having called the kind of tactics used by The Hidden Hand Nazi propaganda. It's not just a Nazi thing. All the extreme and reactionary right-wingers use variations on the same model.

DISCLAIMER: The Holocaust wasn't invented for propagandistic purposes and The Protocols were. So. While it would always be inflammatory to invoke the Holocaust, it might also sometimes be perfectly legitimate. Or at least arguably legitimate. As, for example, with the term "zionazi."

That doesn't cover what Atzmon does, though -- eg, the Christ-killing/Palestinian-killing analogy. There's no basis or precedent for that except in the virulently anti-Judaic and anti-semitic texts of yesteryear. Repeating, endorsing, or otherwise subscribing to those views only ever benefits extreme right-wing reactionaries, with a long, long history of making intentionally false and deceptive appeals to popular sentiment.

As the authors of the OP note:

It is, as such, not surprising that Atzmon's work has received enthusiastic reviews by such prominent members of the racist right as former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, Kevin MacDonald of the Occidental Observer, David Icke, and Arthur Topham's the Radical Press. It should not be surprising that Atzmon has distributed articles defending Holocaust deniers and those who write of "the Hitler we loved and why."15 These connections ultimately serve the interests of Zionism, which seeks to conflate anti-Zionism with anti-Jewishness. Zionist agents have repeatedly attempted to ensnare and link Palestinian, Arab, and/or Muslim rights advocates to Neo-Nazism, through dirty tricks and outright lies.

And they're not the only ones. Because real Neo-Nazis have a rooting interest in the issue, too. But -- unless you're a Neo-Nazi or a zionist agent -- for practical purposes, it doesn't actually matter who's interpolating extreme, right-wing reactionary rhetoric into your movement. You don't even have to know that. You just have to know it for what it is when you see it.

[slimmouse]

Thanks.

It occurs to me that I should state plainly and in so many words that Netanyahu's recent invocation of the Holocaust in connection with Iran is a good example of why I regret having called the kind of tactics used by The Hidden Hand Nazi propaganda. It's not just a Nazi thing. All the extreme and reactionary right-wingers use variations on the same model.

DISCLAIMER: The Holocaust wasn't invented for propagandistic purposes and The Protocols were. So. While it would always be inflammatory to invoke the Holocaust, it might also sometimes be perfectly legitimate. Or at least arguably legitimate. As, for example, with the term "zionazi."

That doesn't cover what Atzmon does, though -- eg, the Christ-killing/Palestinian-killing analogy. There's no basis or precedent for that except in the virulently anti-Judaic and anti-semitic texts of yesteryear. Repeating, endorsing, or otherwise subscribing to those views only ever benefits extreme right-wing reactionaries, with a long, long history of making intentionally false and deceptive appeals to popular sentiment.

As the authors of the OP note:

It is, as such, not surprising that Atzmon's work has received enthusiastic reviews by such prominent members of the racist right as former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, Kevin MacDonald of the Occidental Observer, David Icke, and Arthur Topham's the Radical Press. It should not be surprising that Atzmon has distributed articles defending Holocaust deniers and those who write of "the Hitler we loved and why."15 These connections ultimately serve the interests of Zionism, which seeks to conflate anti-Zionism with anti-Jewishness. Zionist agents have repeatedly attempted to ensnare and link Palestinian, Arab, and/or Muslim rights advocates to Neo-Nazism, through dirty tricks and outright lies.

And they're not the only ones. Because real Neo-Nazis have a rooting interest in the issue, too. But -- unless you're a Neo-Nazi or a zionist agent -- for practical purposes, it doesn't actually matter who's interpolating extreme, right-wing reactionary rhetoric into your movement. You don't even have to know that. You just have to know it for what it is when you see it.

Which particular holoclaust are you referrring to c2w ?

Would that be the only known holocaust amidst every current "reputable" historical source ? The only holocaust mentionable in current rhetoric ?

I assume so.

Hey and do us all a favour, stop dropping Icke in at every opportunity. Otherwise, intelligent people might be forgiven for suggesting that you might be trying to direct attention from the thread, and maybe get it locked ? From what I can see, theres no mention of the name recently on this thread other than yours.