[ Truths About Judaism: Historical Study Guide | Articles on Jews | Real Jewish Studies in Detail   |   Back to Main Website ]

A Guide for the Perplexed: Cutting Through the Jungle of Jewish Influences on White Ideas. And an Introduction to Jewish Influences on Education.

  by Rerevisionist   6 Dec 2012 - v. 21 December 2017 22:00

Jewish Influences on White Beliefs: Disentangling Puzzles
Introduction - Why This Guide is Needed

• Misunderstanding the World: Everyday Examples of Unnoticed Jewish Influence | Appeasement | Reform | Puritanism | Democracy | Socialism | Anarchism | Communism | Primitive Communism | Capitalism | Collectivism | Feudalism | Foreign Aid | Do Targets Always Fail? | Individualism | Jewish Characteristics | Left vs Right, 'Leftism' | Liberalism | Free Speech | Free Trade | Nations, Nationalism, National Characteristics | Patriotism | Populism | Progressive | Protests | Extremism | Nationalisation, Privatisation | Planned Economy | Conservatism | Religion & Free Thought (& Church of England) | Women and Family Life, Feminism | Sex Perversions | Slavery | 1960s | Pacifism | Two Sides to Every Question | Intellectuals | Jewish™ word abuse | 'Concentration Camps' | 'Minorities' | Multiculturalism | World Government, New World Order | Parliaments and Opposition | Race, 'Racism', & Jews


Jewish Influences on Academic Subjects:   Economics | Politics | Sociology | History | Religion | Health | Conclusion

VIDEOS on general Jewish influence, with on-screen notes and images, to make relocating discussion topics fairly easy.
JEWISH QUESTION 1  Rae West & Andrew Carrington Hitchcock - 3 Aug 2017, 1hr
JEWISH QUESTION 2  Rae West & Andrew Carrington Hitchcock - 30 Aug 2017, 1hr
Big lies, nuclear lies, Jews' aggressions after WW2  Rae West & Paul Stevenson - 8 Sept 2017, 96 min
2000 Years of Unexamined 'Jew' Harm  Rae West & Andrew Carrington Hitchcock - 4 Oct 2017, 1 hr
Jew Shock: Discover Jews - Your Life May Depend on it  Rae West & Fakeologist - Sept 2016, 50 min. (Youtube disabled some features; it's perfectly OK. Sigh)

zionism-introduction Why This Guide Is Needed
'Jews' are a sub-race and mixed-race produced by the written word and by city civilisation. Without the effects of reading and writing, and the effects of large crowds in diminishing mutual familiarity, 'Jews' could probably never have existed.

It's important for us to identify the influence of 'Jews' (as they call themselves) on the world of ideas—the words, phrases, memes, and concepts which form part of 'conventional wisdom'.  I make no apology for this: throughout history there have been dominating concerns—new industries, settling the New World, the Black Death, famine; and no doubt inventing agriculture, and dealing with iron weapons. And enemies—the 'Yellow Peril', the 'Hun', 'Oranges and Greens', Disraeli's two nations, the 'Argies'; and 'blues and greens', Romans vs Cathaginians.  At present Jewish influence is the least-discussed of all important issues.

For an introduction to Jewish influences in the USA, I recommend Kevin MacDonald's books.  He's an evolutionary psychologist, with tenure, in California.  As far as I know, there are no similar detailed books dealing with the UK and European experience, though there are foreshadowings (e.g. Jane Birdwood's Longest Hatred). It's essential that serious people work to change this situation.

MacDonald's 'Culture of Critique' deals with secret Jewish propaganda.  It's not published by a mainstream publisher—publishing is Jewish-controlled—but by an expensive press and, more recently, by less expensive print-on-demand technology, a by-product of Internet.  There is a Kindle download online. His books are intellectually cautious—for example, nothing on Malthus, nothing on Marx, and not much on white eugenics theory; no Khazar theory, no 'holocaust denial'; nothing on: Kennedy's murder related to currency, Gulf of Tonkin, 'Liberty', 9/11, or science revisionism. The power of his books derives from the detail—page after page of secret Jewish activity, Jewish false names, Jewish unremitting and unscrupulous lies and deceit, Jewish organisations fronted by rented idiots.

If you don't believe me, and, after all, evidence is what's needed, read and see.  Only those people who research for themselves will ever see this material.  There are, and probably will remain, millions of people totally ignorant of what is one of the most important malign influences in the world.

One of MacDonald's studies is of Boas, a Jew who, incredibly, spent his whole  life claiming race doesn't exist, though his studies stopped at Jews, who, with the fanaticism of his Eurasian superstitions, he naturally assumed were the 'chosen people of God'. Probably everyone reading this piece will, deep in their minds, 'know' some error promoted by Boas.  For example, the idea that the South Sea Islands are a sexual paradise of free love was promoted by Margaret Mead, one of Boas's 'shabbas goy' pupils.  The idea that rigorous tests have shown no differences whatever between races is another often-quoted lie from Boas.

Another of MacDonald’s examples—well worth careful reading—is Freud, with his emphasis on dreams, sex, excretion, cannibalism, incest and so on, though in practice most of Freud's followers used his writings as a money-making scam. That at least is the usual view now. MacDonald goes deeper: '... Freud managed to diagnose Western culture as essentially neurotic while apparently, on the basis of the argument in Moses and Monotheism, holding the view that Judaism represents the epitome of mental health and moral and intellectual superiority. ...'  and  ' ... Love or romance had no place in the Judengasse [Jewish quarter].'   'Love was therefore viewed by Freud as an invention of the alien gentile culture ...'
    We also have Theodor Adorno (of The Authoritarian Personality, an attack on white lifestyles, but not extremist Jews). And the Jewish 'Frankfurt School', full of attacks on white males and their families, usually by deceptive wordings.

Anyone with their J-dar screens turned on knows all this.  However, I want to concentrate here on the way perfectly reasonable, sensible and justifiable ideas have been altered, specifically by Jews, for their own purposes.  Clearly, ideas are absorbed from many sources: the English language has 'loan words' from many languages; after Newton, peoples' views of the universe were permanently changed; after the theory of evolution, new attitudes arose which were impossible before it; Britons of the empire returning from India after a lifetime brought assorted ideas from Kundalini and Yoga, to caste and the 'Light of Asia'.  But let's concentrate on Jewish malicious, deliberate and planned infiltration and change.
    Note that abstractions are well-adapted to subtle changes of meaning, since their content depends on examples, which can be changed, dropped, augmented as required. This must happen in any case with changes: a 'war' now is different from a 'war' a few centuries ago; 'monarchs' are different now; 'democracy' remains obstinately vague; 'ownership' depends on networks of ways things are done at the time; 'food' changes with new developments; connotations change. And examples can and must be selected. I've just watched a typical propagandist TV news clip, showing black African males in some sort of rented craft being taken aboard some official craft in the Mediterranean, accompanied by a voiceover by an actress. At the same time, of course, as has been the case for many years, no news items of dead Palestinians are shown. In this way, abstractions such as 'invasion' and 'killings' and 'freedom of travel' can be modified, given the presence of propaganda media. Such words as 'slavery' and 'serfdom' and 'market' are well-adapted for propaganda, because the literate readers are unlikely to have any serious experience of the issues.
      I'll look at topics one by one, concentrating on Jewish inputs. In the hope that some people will be less puzzled than before. I've included some exegesis of words and phrases:-
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Start here: Learning to Separate Out Jews and Jewish Influences from 'Gentiles'. 'Goys' vs 'Kikes'
For centuries, Jewish influence has been kept as secret as possible. For example, most whites have no idea what the 'Jewish' so-called 'Holy Books' are, or what they say. Another example of secrecy is money: few people, still, understand the 'Federal Reserve' in the USA. Yet another aspect of secrecy: even now, not many people understand Jewish control of the media.
    It is, now, abundantly clear that Jews are a serious danger to civilisation. If it isn't clear to you, I hope this material will help convince you; or if not, other online material, for example the websites listed with short descriptions in my J-dar list. Please understand the importance of separating Jews and their policies from other people and their interests.
    There is a danger that if you try to take them on point by point and refute all their arguments and reveal all their hypocrisies, you will be like a man trying to kill fleas one by one. Better to realize that the whole kit and caboodle is mostly a product of Jewish power and confront that power forthrightly.
    My examples, below, from the media and Internet, are (I hope) as varied as possible without losing sight of the common Jewish factor. Followed by comments on many beliefs, slogans, and memes of modern times. [ Back to Start of 'Guide to the Perplexed about Jews' ]

More Samples of Failure to identify Jews: 
Andrew Anglin somewhere says women should be kept out of serious work. His example was of Jewish women pretending to welcome 'strangers'. Obviously they were simply damaging their temporary host society.
Trade Unionists often fail to identify Jew control: in England for example UNISON is run by Jews, so is the Students Union; so is Equity, the closed shop actors' union. Many British people think the so-called 'Labour Party was founded by unions, or by activists, or whatever, when in fact subversive Jewish money assembled it. A Jewish-controlled closed shop can remove all freedom from workers.
Wars are generally Jew-promoted and have been for centuries. Probably most of the naive sheep, treating a war as a job, have no inkling that Jews are behind it. Ferdinand Tuohy (1920): 'The average British soldier ... frankly took not the slightest interest in the war except as it affected his interior, his comfort and leave.'
The money system now allows Jews to charge interest from governments, so they want governments to get into debt. This is a reason for Jew encouragement of illegal invaders, which they want the government to pay for, at the cost, of course, of future payments by taxpayers, not from current spending, which would be dangerously obvious.
Many people can't understand that Muslims are allowed to pass border controls of white countries, because Jews control borders. Muslims could not enter without covert help.
Very many people cannot understand the hatred in the Talmud for non-Jews, and in their spin-off book, the Quran. Mass murders in the USSR, in the Ukraine, mass rapes, mass lies, wars in the Middle East, are outside the awareness of most people, who of course are not informed by the Jewish-controlled media. Maybe they only learn the hard way.
    Typical puzzle: Government figures show one thing, then the opposite! Now they're saying something else! It's so baffling! You can prove anything with statistics! Oh my God!
    Answer: Jews dominate modern regimes, usually in semi-secret. The figures may have come from Jews, whose chosen policy is to lie. Don't assume 'government' figures come from 'your' government.
    Typical puzzle: A prestigeous American research institute says the gap between the poorest and richest incomes is only one to ten! Not that bad!
    Answer: The 'income gap' is statistical fakery. Some people own assets, property etc and underdeclare their income. The differences in capital between the top and bottom are a damn sight more than ten to one!!
    Typical puzzle: It's odd how little official information is available about so-called Jews.
    Answer: Jews have access to the Fed; 'chosen' people get vastly more money than others. When it suits them, Jews claim to be 'white', to keep hidden.
    Typical puzzle: If Americans get back to Christianity things will be so much better! We must return to Jesus!
    Answer: One of the most devastating wars in America was the so-called Civil War. Huge areas were destroyed. Both sides were 'Christian'. Is that what you really want? And you are still under Jewish influence. Why accept their rubbish? Get a feel for the likelihood that (as now in the USA) Jews tell lies on an industrial scale which you've been unable to fight against. Look at evidence that Christianity (and Islam) were both part-Jewish fakes.
    Typical puzzle: 1930s Britain came round to the view that war with Germany was necessary, didn't it?
    Answer: It's now known that Hitler didn't want war, but Jews did, and got it through Churchill's lies. It was not 'British' policy. Jews (for example Bernard Baruch, who was economic dictator of the USA when it entered the First World War) did their best to persuade influential Britons that they would benefit—even though their entire empire, and centuries of assets, would be lost.
    Typical puzzle: On immigration, there are medical issues such as TB, rickets, and diseases of inbreeding; there are legal issues over so-called 'human rights', housing, and free legal aid, which Britons don't get; issues over crimes, education, disappearing farmland, wildlife used as food, rape, and many other issues. Surely the professional bodies in charge of medicine, law, town planning, policing, civil servants and so on are doing their best?
    Answer: No. Because of Jewish control over money, they have either successfully installed Jewish puppets (including 'Common Purpose graduates' and so-called 'trade unions'; nothing to do with traditional trade unions) into all these supposedly professional bodies, or use legal threats to silence them.
    Typical puzzle: I love Jews! I work in TV and my boss was a Jew, and naturally had more money than I could dream of! I worked hard and made quite a few programmes which I new were lies, but what the hell! I'm a success!
    Answer: Well, let's hope you get lied to and lose all your money, such as it is! (And learn to spell).
    Typical puzzle: The EU under Merkel are now thinking of allowing invaders, sorry immigrants, into Europe provided they work. Is this a genuine change of policy?
    Answer: You have to learn to separate Jewish policy from EU policy. Merkel is a simpleton who thinks she's a Jew, from Poland, and follows secret Jewish policy, which is to wreck white countries through immigration of low-intelligence males. Another Jewish policy is to make money by buying housing (with their paper money fraud) and renting it to invaders, leading to ever-rising debt. However, genuine people living in Europe obviously don't want either of these things.
    Typical puzzle: European governments are facilitating the passage of migrants across the Mediterranean. Why are they doing this? I'm not sure these migrants all want to work hard for us, especially as many are illiterate, although the Jewish-owned media keeps repeating what a benefit they are, but oddly they don't apply that argument to Israel.
    Answer: It's Jewish policy to ruin white countries. At present, they use non-white invasion to harm white countries. The invasion is not into Israel. And non-white countries are mostly in a mess already. The governments are run by Jews and their puppets; look for example at Sweden, where all the media are Jew-run. The governments you talk about are not European; they are Jews who now control, for the moment, some governments.
bishop of manchester
This freak is the 'Bishop of Manchester'. The cathedral has exhibits applauding wars—the Boer War, the First World War. And of course the Second World War
    Typical puzzle: 86 Bishops in the UK asked Cameron, the Jewish Prime Minister, to accept huge numbers of immigrants; they said they knew people who had housing to rent to them. Why this odd generosity?
    Answer: Well, their apparent generosity! They were assuming transport, housing, medical, education, crime and other costs would be paid by the British. Probably the 'owners' of the housing had borrowed from Jews and wanted others to pay their mortgages. Jews support this: (1) Because the public deficit would increase, providing more paper money to Jews; (2) They would make money from the mortgages etc—even though this is not sustainable, as the size of the deficit proves; (3) Jews, who are not white, want to destroy white countries. The Bishops did not as far as I know offer to pay rent and expenses from Church assets; they prefer to offload the costs and collect money. The two supposed leaders of the C of E—a Jew and an African—seem to have kept out, probably to avoid comment. Of course, when the Church gives all its money to Africa, I may withdraw this comment, provided they restore assets to the British first.
    Typical puzzle: Rapes and frauds and unasked-for unassimilable hordes of spongers: how can officials and politicians sleep at night?
    Answer: Whites have some genetic tendency to worry about the future. But Jews genetically seem mostly to be parasitic. They don't worry about harm, any more than cuckoos or hyenas or tapeworms do. No doubt the people bribed or duped into cooperation lean the same way.
    Typical puzzle: But everyone can see Jews are whites! Why do you claim they aren't?
    Answer: Jews claim they're descended from Moses (who never existed) in the near east. Most in fact seem to be descendants of Khazars, from Asia. Either way, they do not consider themselves to be whites, but a racial group of their own, with strict racial rules of the Apartheid type, except more restrictive. And bear in mind that Jews want to falsify immigration, crime, and education statistics. If they call themselves 'white' the statistics show more whites than there are, at least until they leave. (This is also the reason Hispanics in the USA are counted as 'white').
    Typical puzzle: I read, in Europe, that some people want a Germans-only state. What does that mean? It's perfectly natural that Germany is for ethnic Germans. Other peoples have homelands. E.g., the Slovak Republic for the Slovaks and the Czech Republic for the Czechs.
    Answer: It's obvious to you, but Jews want to weaken any rival populations. It's why Merkel is anti-German now, just as Roosevelt and Churchill and Stalin were anti-German.
    Typical puzzle: Why has America been so warlike since 1945? What is it about Americans that makes them so violent?
    Answer: It is not 'American' policy. Because Jews had complete control over paper money since 1913, their genetic violent hatreds have been given full rein, so far as Jewish media permitted. Many people call the USA a 'ZOG' regime—Zionist Occupation Regime.
    Typical puzzle: What is this supposed to mean?– In this instant of polarization, those who politically, economically, ethically, or emotionally depend upon the domination of black people are forced to cling hard to hatred. Ending white supremacy will make this a better country for everyone, but the struggle will certainly bring more pain to those who already suffer most. White supremacy is a source of constant terror to people of color and is damaging to the humanity and prosperity of people who are considered white. So, what would it take for the sad, angry people clinging to their whiteness to have something to feel real good about? We master Jews know all about pain and suffering and hate; everyone must pay out of their prosperity, to enable black wisdom to come to the surface.
    Answer: Very many people still don't know that Jews habitually distort language; it's part of their parasitic heritage. And a reason why Jews are such poor speakers, since it takes time to construct sentences with misleading insubstantiality; they prefer one-way deception, as in advertising, TV, film, 'newspapers'. This intentional drivel operates on whatever script Jews are working for at any one time. In the 1930s, pretences about Hitler. In the 1960s, concealment of US war crimes. In the 1980s, anti-Apartheid material and pretences about race. In each case, Jewish money-making and asset-grabbing policies are hidden. The example above tries to combine multiple pretences: that whites don't exist, that Jews are honest and humanitarian and have little power, that blacks are successful, that hate is a leading emotion in non-Jews, and so on. It's up to you to (1) spend time on the factual bases, (2) get the feel of the techniques of lying when there is something approaching a monopoly. This monopoly has only come under attack since the advent of Internet.
    Typical puzzle: Iraq wars have been a disaster. What a mess! What a mistake!
    Answer: These wars were Jewish. ('Neo-Con'). They manipulated simple Americans into wars. From the Jewish point of view the wars were a success, because they caused destruction and chaos, and because (e.g. In Libya) they allowed Jews to take over or invent a central bank, from which they could parasitise the country, taking a yearly percentage.
    Typical puzzle: I've just read that country X is full of people who say they should not repay their country's debts! Who do they think they are?
    Answer: You must learn to identify Jewish interests and distinguish them from other people's. Jews typically fund corrupt leaders, make them loans of junk paper money, and when the supposed benefits to X's public don't appear, want their paper money back anyway, in the form of real assets. The debts are NOT owed by the country X, but by the corrupt funded cliques.
    Typical puzzle: Jews are chosen by God!
    Answer: You could do yourself a favour by updating your outlook to include information on 'Jews' which is now available to all: for example, Biblical Jews are not modern Jews; modern Jews don't regard the Old Testament as serious Jewish stuff; all the archaeological evidence about so-called Jews cast doubts on everything they say they believe; and Jewish control of paper money allows them to fund speakers, typically American, viewed by the rest of the world as ridiculous figures of fun. You might also reflect if 'God' would be happy with Jewish lies, frauds, and violence.
    Typical puzzle: The success of Google is just one proof of Jewish skill with money!
    Answer: Google has huge data centers round the world. These cost a huge amount—and of course Jews have paper money without working for it. They can easily buy out anyone else. The rest is a matter of selecting employees.
    Typical puzzle: Nearly 20 percent of Sweden's population is nonwhite, and most are simply sponging off the generous welfare state, which is supported by working white native Swedes.
    Answer: That isn't the full picture. Parasitic immigrants in fact cost far more than day-to-day work can support. The extra burden is met by loans to the Swedish government, controlled by Jews, so future indebtedness builds up. And by the sale of Swedish assets such as businesses, housing, raw materials, overseas assets, and land. These may have taken many centuries to build. So Sweden as a state is impoverished, while 'Jews' think they are benefitting.
    Typical puzzle: Here's a philosopher discussing the human race so far: '... the principle of universal sympathy conquered first one province, then another. It is the analogue, in the realm of feeling, of impersonal curiosity in the realm of intellect; both alike are essential elements in mental growth. ... the whole history of man since ... Buddha points in the opposite direction [from tribal or aristocratic ethics].'
    Answer: Jews have such a strikingly different genetic outlook that they have been success in appealing to other people's supposed universal sympathy to get what they think are their own ends. The passage quoted was written just before the largest war in human history, just one proof that the supposed factual basis is untrue. Many people have noted the Jewish tendency to claim (for example) that the USA is a 'propositional nation', the idea being to attract attention away from the true multiple causes behind nations and countries. The gullible targets are sometimes called 'pathological altruists' (not my choice of phrase).
    Typical puzzle: China is motoring! It's so rich! It's the biggest economy in the world!! Oh, wow!!!
    Answer: Jews assess economies by the money they (Jews) make from them. Media 'analysts' are controlled by Jews. This is why pollution, huge poverty, and so on are ignored.

Nick Griffin revealed (about 6 years later) that the BNP had been asked not to mention Jews and money; just Muslims. This talk includes info about Jews funding anti-white groups. (Less than 3 mins)
    Typical puzzle: The stealth war against Christianity is being waged across Western Europe as the Islamic Arab Spring in Europe starts. France is one such country, in the Saudis drive to lay the foundations of an Islamic Europe aided by fools such as Angela Merkel and the French Socialist government in Paris. Demolishing historical churches and allowing conversions of many of them into mosques is just one aspect of the Mosque building campaign.
    Answer: France is dominated by Jews. (See for example articles in TheOccidentalObserver). Merkel is a Jew, and the 'socialist' government is Jewish, not socialist, like the so-called 'Labour' Party in Britain. At present, Jews seem to think large numbers of Muslims in Europe will be 'good for Jews'. Jews, unfortunately, dominate Arabia and its money, much of which of course is paper, ultimately sourced from Jews. British Jews have a double policy: insulting Muslims when it suits them, while at the same time opposing 'Islamophobia'. As always, it's essential to isolate the Jewish part in these disputes.
    Typical puzzle: The Roman Catholic Church prohibited usury, which I'm told is the same as interest. Is this true? Why?
    Answer: The official, traditional view is that the Church regarded interest as sinful. So the faithful were warned emphatically not to try to get involved. But the Church borrowed from Jews; it's possible the ban was just to keep a monopoly for Jews, who would pass some of the money they extorted to the Church. This of course would be secret.
      The secular view of 'usury' was that it involved excessive penalties if debts were not repaid; the 'pound of flesh' being an example. It was not just interest.
    Typical puzzle: Charities continually ask for donations, and have been since 1945; they promise to wipe out poverty in a few decades. Yet there seems no evidence anything much has changed in (say) India. What's going on?
    Answer: Charities are just another money-making fraud. Jews printed trillions of paper dollars a few years ago; none go to the Third World. Except to repay interest to Jews.
    Typical puzzle: What do 'philanthropists' do?
    Answer: So-called 'Jews' sometimes fund other Jews. They are very careful not to give anything to non-Jews! It's a common ploy to describe Kikes as 'philanthropists', to pretend they are doing things for people as a whole. Watch for it!
    Typical puzzle: Saudi Arabia has quite a high proportion of the world's oil. But it is not run by Jews. So your whole argument is nonsense.
    Answer: Until even a century ago Arab countries had little independence. The fact is Saudi Arabia is run by covert Jews, and Jews presumably control their money supply too. Watch for this.
    Typical puzzle: It is entirely right that education should emphasise good citizenship and awareness of horrors of the past. It is shocking that anyone could even begin to oppose that.
    Answer: You should learn to separate out Jewish influence. Jewish education is emphatic—in support of anti-white activities, cultish tribalism, and explicit agreement that true comments on Jews ought to be suppressed.
    Typical puzzle: House prices have gone up every year since 1945! This is proof the system works!
    Answer: There's a supply and demand element, but also a loan element. It was found people will fund mortgages, within some limits. Whether this is sustainable depends on the costs of holding property (taxes etc), operating property (fuel, maintenance etc), death duties and estate duties, and value of property. But all these matters depend on money supply and credit control. Therefore it's essential to isolate the Jewish component. As can be seen by Jewish ownership of rented lots to blacks in the USA, Jewish speculation in 1950s Britain, the much later subprime loans fiasco in the USA, the attempts to force people to pay for unwanted immigrant rents, and homeless ex-soldiers and others, and the problems young people who aren't immigrants have, the subject needs a close look—in which Jewish activities must be examined.
    Typical puzzle: The American military machine is pathetic and useless. They have lost every war—the Russians defeated Germany, not the Americans. The Americans couldn't move the Koreans north. Vietnam was a defeat for America.
    Answer: You need to understand Jewish influence. Your idea of victory is not the same as their idea. US wars in the Philippines were successful, at least in installing regimes—possibly the US equivalent of the Boer Wars. Check to see how much profit Jews made from wars; and check if Vietnamese currency is run by Jews, for example. Lyndon Johnson was made President by J F Kennedy's murder, precisely to secure Jews further into the USA. The rule is: if there's a vicious war, Jews blame others, not themselves.
'Chief Rabbi' of Britain
This uneducated creationist freak is Britain's so-called 'Chief Rabbi'. Open borders for goyim, not for Israel! War deaths for goyim, not for Israel!— are typical motivations of such mentally-ill oddities.
    Typical puzzle: War is a serious and expensive thing. Nobody would take this dread decision without very serious reason.
    Answer: You may think so. But Jewish policy is tribal and full of praise for murder and slaughter. The reason Jews fund wars is precisely because they put profit above supposed ideals. When considering wars, try to separate the interests of Jews internationally from the interests of the rest of the people of the countries they live in. Certainly all major wars have been followed by financial reckoning, sometimes continuing for centuries—Jews are happy others should be impoverished and killed, but have had no intention of giving up their profits.
    Typical puzzle: Britain's Labour Party has a great tradition of high taxation of the rich! British Socialism is a movement of equality!
    Answer: High taxation does not apply to Jews running the paper money (and e-money) system. You seem to think 'the rich' are all the same type. This is not true, as a look at the last few hundred years proves. In fact, the tax system has of course been used to target specific British groups.
    Typical puzzle: Jews are scapegoats. The collective power of Jews is limited. They can't control the world!
    Answer: Yes, Jewish power is not unlimited. But 10,000 people in power positions can control a country. (The link is mainly to voerioc, a French commenter; France is another ZOG regime). Places to look are positions where long-term policies can be implemented.
    Examples: 'Think tanks' following such covert Jew agenda as abortion, family law, removing capital punishment with white victims, forcing immigration, getting control of education, getting control of media, getting control of food and transport. A huge range of activities is involved and needs to be understood: schools may teach falsified history; hospitals may be made to take unqualified staff; housing schemes may be designed specifically to covertly install invaders; jobs may be taken from local whites; trade in some goods may be altered in ways Jews like.
    With this understanding, it's easier to understand why advertisements include mixed race couples, why TV lies about riots and wars, why estate/house agents install immigrants, why new laws are obviously silly in unexpected ways, why charities often do not do what they nominally say they do, why health measures are sometimes damaging, why voting fraud is left alone. Think about fluoridation; 9/11 with TV all under Jewish control broadcasting the same fake videos in co-operation with Jewish control of airplane movements and Jewish release of obvious suspects; interest rate changes; 'privatisation' to cover Jewish acquisitions; deliberately unworkable education schemes; anti-Christian moves to get rid of Christmas and its imagery; selective punishments of hotels which don't want to cater for homosexuals, while homosexual hotels are allowed to discriminate; lack of any action on paedophilia/pedophilia; pornography. And many, many such activities all the way up to full-scale frauds, wars and devastation. Find an example for yourself; this is probably the most convincing learning experience. When watching some anti-white or anti-Muslim material on TV, for example, ask yourself why you never see any TV material on Jews.
    Typical puzzle: I've heard people talk of 'race war'. Don't they know any history? All wars are between nations, and usually about religious differences.
    Answer: You haven't realised the Jewish control of media internationally allows different messages to be sent to different groups of people. At present, there are Jewish films and TV programmes in the USA which are explicitly anti-white, typically with Mexicans or Africans killing whites. And Jewish-controlled news worldwide censors violence against whites: think of Chicago, Sweden, South Africa. You have to understand Jews are more race-aware than any other group, possibly excepting African tribes, with a simple, pre-scientific tribal outlook. This awareness is now world-wide, since they network with fellow cult fanatics in many countries of the world. Presumably if Jews leave Europe they will broadcast similar propaganda showing Muslims killing whites, but not of course Jews.
    Typical puzzle: The judeo-Christian heritage is a rich vein of culture throughout the whole of European history. Without Jews, the soul of Europe will be lost!
    Answer: The phrase 'Judeo-Christian' is a recent propaganda fiction. The writings of so-called Jews have nothing in common with Christian writings or culture. You need to identify the two strands which of course Jews are anxious to conflate—for the present.
    But of course 'Christianity' when it was forced by a Roman emperor onto Rome, and later onto the empire, had Jewish roots. Presumably the whole project was to invent a new religion, in which Jews had a stake for the first time. It's another case where Jews please themselves whether or not to claim a connection. At present, there's a move to claim complete separation, to support the Holohoax fraud. Here's an account of Jews inventing both Christianity and Islam, by manipulating powerful figures.
    Typical puzzle: If Jews are compulsive liars, using 'directed deception' against anyone they think is an enemy—what's your opinion of the New Testament, all written by Jews?
    Answer: Very good point (which only occurred to me recently). Obviously Jews wanted to try to take over the possible religion in Rome and its empire, and they were amazingly successful, inventing a fictitious miracle-worker and wandering orator. Many gullible people still revere the ridiculous fake of Yeshua or 'Jesus'. Read this short piece Hijacked Christianity.
    Typical puzzle: Africans cannot run modern countries. Their collective IQs are too low. Nothing to do with Jews!
    Answer: This appears to be true. But it's important to remember that white countries are not the only places with heavy covert ZOG influence. Remember Napoleon and (later) Disraeli and Egypt. The Boer Wars were Jewish as much as British; if not more so. One reason for wars in the Congo was for uranium ore. Idi Amin in Uganda was ridiculed as a shocking black tyrant; but one of his reasons appears to have been his perception of malign Jewish influence. If Africa had more assets, no doubt there would be more Jewish proxy wars and atrocities. In the USA, remember blacks almost all rent from Jews.
    Typical puzzle: Melvin Polatnick: Billionaire investors [read: 'Jews'] don't look at European culture only at profits. High labor costs have to go and they will disappear. My Uncle invested in a 120 million chemical complex in Stuttgart only on the condition that its construction and labor force came from North Africa. Most investors don't want high priced European labor in their contracts. New life styles are needed by Europeans if they are going to survive.
    Answer: This is a typical 'Jew' comment. 'Jews' have swindled untold percentages of the world money by the paper money fraud, the 'Holohoax' fraud, the First and Second World War frauds, mass murders around the world. New life, or death, styles are needed by so-called 'Jews' IF they are to survive.
    Typical puzzle: [In Oxfordshire] She wept as she described how the gang threatened to burn her younger brother alive unless she had sex with them. She was repeatedly raped and sold for sex between 2004 and 2007 when she was aged 12 to 15.–Sally comments: These children are sex slaves, plain and simple. It's an ultimate irony that the ethnicity that birthed the 'women's rights' movement - the English - now officially sanction the ultimate violation of them.
    Answer: You haven't understood the dynamic. The initial women's rights movement was English. But it was taken over by 'Jews' for their own ends. For example the post-1945 'feminism' of the USA was a 'Jewish' movement. An earlier example is the use of suffragettes as a cover for 'Jew' violence under false-flag pretences. The English do not 'officially sanction' child abuse, whether by Muslims or so-called 'Jews'.

    Typical puzzle: Who will pay? Ordinary White tax-payers, of course. That's their role in life: to fund their own dispossession by immigrants. If they object, they will be arrested.
    Answer: True. But you haven't understood one subtlety here. Yearly tax is nowhere near enough to pay. The government (whether David Levita Cameron, or 'Jew' Corbyn) borrows 'money' at interest from such people as Rothschild. Repayments may be spread over centuries—if they are possible. Or assets will be sold off to 'Jews'. Most people still don't understand this: when the Jew-ruled BBC reports on the annual British budget, borrowing is never mentioned, despite being part of the biggest item; only pence on drinks and tobacco and minor alterations are reported by the Jewish 'reporters' such as Dimbleby.

    Typical puzzle: "The UK has a long and proud history of providing a safe haven to refugees and the Government will continue to provide" ...
    Answer: This is a typical Jewish lie. When the UK supported wars and genocide—in China, India, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq etc etc there was not the slightest suggestion refugees should be given a 'safe haven'. When Jews carry out mass murders, for example in Armenia, Russia and Palestine, no help or support was or is offered to refugees. Germans were starved by blockades, with, of course, no 'safe haven'.

    Typical puzzle: I've met people like you before. You are troublemakers. Leave things up to men of experience.
    Answer: Jews have caused world wars, huge depressions, mass murders, and the ruins of many countries by financial frauds and instabilities, and by assassinations. At the moment they are planning to wipe out the entire white race. And you call us troublemakers?
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Slogans have to be updated from time to time, in politics and propaganda, as in advertising (though not so often). Some reasons for fighting, on any scale from individuals to full-scale war, are legitimate; some aren't. We don't want to fight but by jingo if we do/ We've got the ships, we've got the men, and got the money too! sufficed for the Crimean War. Swinburne's Whelps and dams of murderous foes may have been taken seriously at the time of South African wars. The war that will end war sufficed as a slogan for the 'Great War', but obviously couldn't be reused for the Second World War. But appeasement holds a special place as a slogan, possibly Churchill's, to encourage Britain and France and the USA a couple of years later to go to war against Germany. Probably every war after 1945 which Jews in the USA wanted used the media propaganda force of 'appeasement' to suggest that (e.g.) Koreans, Vietnamese, Iraqis were keen on war, later if not sooner.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Reform  One of the sleights of hand enforced by the Jewish media is the idea that 'reform' is excluded from the options available to the public. Here are some examples:–
    Typical puzzle: Should Europeans stay in, or leave, the European Union?
    Answer: The two option choice is an unnecessary simplification. Europe clearly could benefit from a genuine discussion forum for European issues of all types. However it would need to be separated from the present USSR-style arrangement where its 'laws' are made without input from the supposed MEPs. Similarly with the US federal government, which needs to slough off its Jewish component, notably of course the 'Fed'.
    Typical puzzle: I'm sick of the BBC keeping quiet on serious issues. It's been like that all my life. It must be sold off.
    Answer: If the BBC was to be sold, all that would happen is that Jews, controlling the paper money system, would outbid anybody, and the standards would be equally bad. The annual tax ('licence') is relatively cheap; it's easy enough to spend as much in a couple of days' entertainment. The obvious solution is a Reformation, and removal of as much of the present hierarchy as necessary.
    Typical puzzle: The aim of the secret Jewish elite and their collaborators is full world government. This will be a terrible disaster for the world.
    Answer: It doesn't seem likely such a government or dictatorship could be stable; typical Jewish parasitism involves increasing debt and free money for them, with ever-increasing propaganda, and ever-increasing controls, so the result is likely to be runaway inflation, severe censorship, and incompetence whenever Jews have a hand in important organisations. But this doesn't mean 'world government' is permanently to be ruled out, any more than national governments are to be ruled out because psychopathic Jews once seized control of Russia. Maybe the differences in populations and peoples are too large; maybe raw materials are too limited; maybe necessary actions will not be taken. But possibly the world might be run better, with a minimum of violence and maximum of happiness, by world government.
    Typical puzzle: What do you think should happen to churches, including the various denominations?
    Answer: I'm unsure if they can be salvaged, since their historical and philosophical foundations have been all but removed, leaving only precarious structures and a financial hole. But if the previous Reformation is any guide, any reforms will be taken up by most of the incumbents, so it's possible churches might be reshaped into something more living.
    Typical puzzle: Oxbridge has dominated, or at least been of some importance, in Britain. Should new universities be established to bypass the abundant incompetencies and dishonesties which have accumulated over the last few centuries? There's even a 'Churchill College'.
    Answer: Money power has shown itself supreme over these superficially picturesque but rotten organisations. With care it may be possible to reshape them.
    Typical puzzle: In Britain, there's a Labour party leadership contest, with a left-wing candidate, Corbyn. Should I support him, or a more right-wing candidate?
    Answer: The so-called 'Labour' Party in Britain has mostly been a front for Jews. Corbyn is just another Jewish puppet; he has never condemned Jews for lies about the Holocaust; he says nothing about Jews in the USSR; he says nothing about Jewish control of money and why they want more government debt; he says nothing about Jewish wars, and refugees caused by Jews. He knows nothing about nuclear issues. The supposed left-right divide is irrelevant to Jews, who pursue what they seem to believe are their own interests.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Puritanism.  Debating with someone from Eire, who told me Cromwell's war in Ireland was a war by Puritans, suggested to me the possibility that 'Puritanism' was promoted by Jews to try to reconcile Britons with increased poverty, following the establishment of the Jewish 'Bank of England'. (A principle similar to 'Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité' in France, and 'Communism' in Russia and Eastern Europe, and 'the Free World' in the USA).
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Democracy.  It's difficult now to recapture the feelings of ardent democrats, or assess their sincerity: the feeling that most men, and even more women, were frivolous and unfitted to take serious decisions–but also that many aristocrats and religious people were not pulling their weights. The counter-feeling, that all people have their own spheres in which they are knowledgeable, and mute, inglorious Miltons abound, and that education and science can produce new worlds and new people; resulted in enthusiasms, and theoretical bases from such people as Tom Paine and Jeremy Bentham. In the 19th century, ancient Greece 'became a democracy' (C N Parkinson), and by 1950 Britain attained 'complete democracy' (Bertrand Russell). Votes were extended from large-scale property owners downward. The problem of informing the electorate was assumed to be solved by competition between publishers. One must assume Jewish planners had no intention of supporting any sort of true democracy: experience with the French news presses after Napoleon gave them confidence they could control opinions, and buying-out of rivals, control of news agencies, payments for politicians of all schools and the rest of it all took shape. When Jewish politicians in ZOG countries say they favour democracy, they mean of course a system where they control media and parties and 'think-tanks'.
    Many people now regard support for 'democracy' as a joke, the earlier meanings and enthusiasms having been lost. But some people say that voting patterns do in fact provide pointers to people's desires: according to Richard Edmonds, of the National Front in Britain, Churchill, the warmonger, was voted out at the very first opportunity; Britons were aware of colour problems in the USA, and during the breakup of India; the Conservatives in Britain were elected whenever they asserted they would act on coloured invasion—Macmillan (in 1959), Heath (who let Ugandan Indians into Britain), and Thatcher in 1979, all made this claim during electioneering, and, being large parties, were voted in.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Socialism.  The British Labour Party is not 'socialist'. 'Socialism' was a serious 19th century reaction to technical advances and economies of scale. A range of figures—Joseph Hume, Francis Place, Blatchford, Robert Owen, John Ruskin, Hyndman, William Morris, H G Wells, Oscar Wilde, Keir Hardie, John Burns, Bertrand Russell, called themselves radicals or 'socialists', where socialism meant something like democratic control over economics.  BUT the Labour Party in about 1900 was shadowed and funded by Jews, unsurprisingly really, since the cloth-capped millions and rural and urban labourers were not a reliable source of dues. In my opinion, the 'Labour Party' would not have existed without Jews.  So it was partly taken over by rich Jews via financial muscle.  Jews' biggest victory to date was the 'Soviet Union': if you call murdering millions of Russians 'socialism', then you haven't understood Jewish propaganda. The 'left', and 'reds' and 'communism', is a euphemism for Jewish fake socialism, meaning the parasitism of creative economics by Jews, and the redistribution of wealth to Jews, supported from outside by collaborators, in this case the Federal Reserve and banks.
    Typical puzzle: the Tories [or Republicans] are encouraging class warfare, in the hope when the shit hits the fan, we won't blame them but will blame immigrants, people on benefits, other victims, or capitalism.
    Answer: No. Jews are encouraging 'class warfare' (in fact, useless bitching) in the hope that people won't notice their effects in WW1, WW2, frauds, Vietnam War, Kennedy murder, 9/11 etc.
    Typical puzzle: "Whoever heard of a 'Jewish Communist'?"
    Answer: Well, you won't if you read ordinary books and news stuff owned by Jews, or watch films and TV run by Jewish media companies. But it's well-known to people who have checked the facts—for example, the 'pale' area for Jews was in western Russia and Poland, and that area had 'Jews' for centuries in large numbers, and these formed the supporters of 'Communism' in eastern Europe.
    Typical puzzle: Why do people call the BBC or 'New York Times' 'left', when they couldn't care less about wars and death and exploitation around the world, control of minerals etc?
    Answer: the BBC and New York Times support Jews—control over paper money, central banks around the world, and their assets, for example 'Margaret Hodge' and her millions from steel.  It does not support any other oppressed people—including whites.
    Typical puzzle: Please give an example of the misuse of the word 'socialism'.
    Answer: Here's one: "Socialists can be robust and experienced people. One thinks of Josef Stalin ..."—from a speech by James Lewthwaite.
    Typical puzzle: What relation was there between Christianity and Socialism?
    Answer: There were geographical variations. Countries without much industry (e.g. Spain, Ireland, eastern Europe) tended to see no use for socialism. Countries which industrialised relatively early, such as Britain, had legal and debate conflicts; there was a 'Christian Socialist' movement, and some trade unions adopted Christian imagery. Countries with Jewish finance (e.g. Britain, France, Germany) had secret Jewish movements to oppose Christianity, and secretly promote Socialism as a Jewish movement, though the pretence was less in Russia and after the Jewish coup they renamed it 'communism'.
    Typical puzzle: Jeremy Corbyn in Britain says he's a socialist. Is he?
    Answer: Corbyn, who thinks he's a Jew, said nothing about child abuse in Islington, his area. He says nothing about Jewish paper money, or their huge debt build-up, or Margaret Hodge (real name Oppenheimer) in Islington, hugely wealthy from Egyptian steel and yet in the so-called 'Labour Party'. He wants indefinite immigration into Britain, and indeed Europe. He probably knows nuclear weapons are a Jewish fraud, and may as well work an exit strategy to get out. He has said nothing about compensation for Germans for the 'Holocaust' fraud. As far as I know he hasn't discussed the Liberty, Jews profiting from wars, or Jews and 9/11. In short, he's just another Jewish 'Communist' liar.
Eric Hobsbawm Jew
Eric Hobsbawm. Late 'British' historian. Click for his talk on the 'Russian' Revolution
    Typical puzzle: Does Socialism work?
    Answer: Sigh. The problem is 'socialism' is used in two senses. One is the idealistic, theory-inspired, feeling that human beings ought to be able to use knowledge and technology to make happier societies than in the past. There seems no convincing evidence such a system could not work. The other meaning is the Jewish attitude that Jews should rule everyone else by force and fraud: 'socialism', but just for Jews. When people such as Corbyn, Benn, Hobsbawm, say socialism works, they are thinking of Russia under Jews—the 'Soviet Union'. Vast numbers of whites and other died, and Jews regard this as desirable. The Soviet Union was backed from outside by Jews, mostly in the USA. If it had been isolated from the world, the Jews would have been slaughtered in reaction. So, did 'socialism' work? If you're happy with large numbers of deaths, and a system which only worked when supplied from outside, and a pre-scientific outlook, and you did not worry about long-term sustainability, then what Jews call 'socialism' worked. Not otherwise.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

    Typical puzzle: What is 'Anarchism'?
    Answer: This may be an idealistic theory based either on dislike of governments (for example, in 19th century Spain) or on the feeling that mankind should be able to handle its own affairs. Kropotkin, a Russian, was the main exponent of this idea, which also had some technological input—the world was growing richer. For our purposes these shades of meaning are not very important. Jews in Russia and eastern Europe hated whites and did their best to assassinate (for example) Russian leaders; Stolypin is a well-known example. 'Bomb throwing anarchists' was the euphemism for Jewish murderers, just as 'Communists' was a euphemism for Jewish murderers later.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

    Typical puzzle: Atheistic Communism was the biggest evil in the world. I'm proud we Americans fought it.
    Answer: 'Communism' was 'Jewish Communism'. It was not atheistic! The fight against it has barely started.
    Typical puzzle: 'Communism' was a wonderful attempt to equalise economics. After all, property is theft!
    Answer: It's possible that Jewish genetics have led to instinctive views of 'property', 'maintenance', 'ownership', 'tenure' and so on, which have obscurely different genetic biochemical roots than the non-Jewish equivalents. Certainly, when Jews were paid by other Jews to control the USSR ('Union of Soviet Socialist Republics') what was theirs was theirs, and what was Russians' was theirs too.
    Typical puzzle: the USA allied with Stalin's Communist USSR in the Second World War, but was hostile to Mao's Communist China.  Why the difference?
    Answer: The USSR was run by Jews; so was the USA.  They had common interests and both wished to damage white societies.  China however was not (arguably) run by Jews, so the Jews of the USA were hostile to it.
    Typical puzzle: 'Communism' is really state capitalism, isn't it! That's what Thatcher said to Gorbachev!
    Answer: It was based in Russia on making Russians work for their Jewish masters. The Constitution of the USSR said 'The USSR is composed of workers, peasants, soldiers, and 'intellectuals'—the 'intellectuals' being the parasites who controlled propaganda and used Jewish money to hire engineers and so on and build industries, usually incompetently. It is more accurate to call it 'Jewish Slavery'.
    Typical puzzle: Surely 'Communism' has an old traditional meaning?
    Answer: 'Communism' is related to the idea of communal ownership, or some sort of community. Arguably, monks were trying a form of 'communism'. Italian 'comune' means something like a municipal area. Before Jews perverted the meaning it was a respectable term for a social idea.
    Typical puzzle: 'Communism' I'm told is an extreme form of 'socialism'. How true?
    Answer: OK; let's try again. Engels and others had an idea of 'primitive communism', when people lived in small, organic communities, all happy together, and, arguably, socialist. Villages in Russia had something like 'primitive communism' before the Jewish coup. The Jewish version of 'communism' was that all the worthless goyim would live together in poverty and shit, since they didn't matter, and would be exploited by Jews—by killings, slave labour, prostitution, and forced military service. Of course, this message was modified for simple people such as some western 'intellectuals'.
    Typical puzzle: What exactly is 'Marxism'? I hear of it quite often, but nobody tells me what it is!
    Answer: If Marx had never lived, there would still have been a Jewish problem. Marx was not as important as is pretended. There are some beliefs attributed to Marx (his writings are not coherent, and weren't intended to be): the 'Labour Theory of Value', 'Materialism' in a special sense ('human character is formed only by economic circumstances'), the 'law of concentration of capital', 'revolution', an expression to hide the fact of the very secret co-operation of many Jews. Nothing is original to Marx. He claimed to have been influenced by German philosophy (meaning Hegel, a German historical determinist), French politics (mostly what is called the 'French Revolution'), and English economics (early steam-powered factories and joint-stock companies).
    Note that the 'French Revolution' was largely Jewish, like the 'Russian Revolution'; and English economic practices were founded on the Bank Of England. In each case, Jewish activity was elided away by Marx, though he must certainly have known about it.
    The 'Communist Manifesto' was plagiarised from Victor Considerant of France. Various additions to 'Marxism' were made later: Lenin liked Hobson's book on 'Imperialism', which placed little blame on Jews and therefore suited Lenin's purpose; more recently, Jews in the USA have pretended to write 'Marxist' critiques of US wars and war crimes. All of this has two functions: (1) To hide the true role of Jews as much as possible; in particular, Jewish control of banks; (2) To find allies and useful idiots among the goyim host populations, either by promising them future riches, or in some cases paying them.
    Typical puzzle: 'Marxism'? re-run that please—I'm still puzzled!
    Answer: Marx's Capital is a collection of atrocity stories designed to stimulate martial ardour against the bourgeoisie. The theoretical part is like talk about 'war to end war', 'war for small nations', 'war for democracy'. Its purpose is to make the reader feel the hatred stirred up is righteous indignation. [This statement is modified from Bertrand Russell]
    Typical puzzle: What was the 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat'?
    Answer: This was a slogan intended to hide the Jewish control of the USSR. Obviously the 'dictatorship' was of the Jews who controlled money—whatever they wanted, notably weapons, guns, prison equipment, small arms—could only be bought from industrial countries outside Russia. Later, Stalin moved entire factories from Germany into the USSR. In either case Jews controlled these events. No doubt many of the thugs and underlings carrying out the commands were 'proletarians', which probably helped when for example gullible foreigners were allowed to see small parts of the USSR.
    Typical puzzle: What is 'Stalinism'?
    Answer: It's a Jewish code-word to pretend that Stalin was responsible for Jewish atrocities in the USSR.
      (Note: Stalin—Real name Josef Vissarionovich Djugashvili, a Georgian with an ancestry presumably inseminated by Jew(s)—had a religious education. It's likely he genuinely thought of himself as a prophet of 'Communism'; writings attributed to him suggest this. 'Communism' of course was a smokescreen to conceal Jewish ambitions; for example, the 'bourgeoisie' was a code-word for white 'workers by brain' who were non-Jews, and who were killed where possible by Jews. Most religions have to aim at large constituencies: Christianity was an attempt to hold the Roman Empire together; Confucius aimed to united Chinese; Hinduism was a mixture trying to stabilise India; Islam tried to unite Arabs. Stalin may have been outraged when he found Jews working together, rather than working religiously for 'Communism').
    Typical puzzle: What is 'Trotskyism'?
    Answer: Indicates a naive supporter of the Jewish USSR, combined with the pretence it wasn't Jewish (since 'Trotsky' is not a Jewish name).
    Typical puzzle: What is 'Maoism'?
    Answer: Some Jews (typically, who liked Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin) regard Mao as 'Communist', presumably viewing him as a Jewish puppet without explicitly saying so. At any event, they think, or pretend, he was 'revolutionary' in the sense of springing from and representing peasants and impoverished Chinese, rather than a cult funded externally by Jews. A website www.revcom.us is a cult-of-personality site of Bob Avakian, with all the standardised Jewish memes. (The surname is Jewish; he was/is praised by Richard Zinn). They hold up Mao's "Great Leap Forward" as a shining example for the world to imitate, and advocate a "new synthesis" on how to advance the world to glories even greater than those achieved by Mao and Stalin. (Quotation from The Occidental Observer). As with every single one of the Jewish pseudo-parties, the object is to get mass support without any statement of policy.
    Typical puzzle: I am proud of fighting Communists in Asia! It was a fine achievement by Americans!
    Answer: Korea and Vietnam were wars of atrocity. Incidentally, there was no group called the 'Vietcong'. Jewish media control in the USA has been so powerful they could tell lies, continually, in all the media, with no regard for truth. It's unlikely that (e.g.) Vietnamese peasants were interested in Manchester cotton mills or European wars. Why would they be? Their views opinions were ignored by warmongers whose interests were profit, prostitution, careers for Jews in military establishments, impoverishing people and forcing them to work for them or sell assets, getting control of their money system, getting the US government to borrow money for weapons, making money from bombs—they had no interest in ecological or human damage. Jewish corruption of the whole academic world allowed supporting fake evidence; here's how fake psychology was used to hide US war crimes in Korea: 'Brainwashing' scare.
    Typical puzzle: If that's so, why call them 'Communists' and not, say, Yellow Peril, or South East Asia freaks, or Atheists?
    Answer: Because at the time it was important to pretend the USSR was Russian, and that the 'Cold War' was genuine, and 'Russian Communist'. 'Communism' was not to be shown to be Jewish, and obviously Vietnam wasn't Jewish.

I've lost the source of the following extract; but I'll leave it here:–
This “little Jew” is portrayed as a naive individualist, which is what Jews never are. They are cunning and help each other. Thus they are able to avoid most disadvantages of their own policies. Trying to appeal to a sense of “betrayal” of the little Jews by the Big Jews is in vain. They will help each other no matter what, all for the Higher Purpose of the ultimate Jewish victory over the Goyim. It is like a nation in war. Ordinary citizens will accept certain inconveniences if it helps the war effort. The Jews consider themselves “at war” with us already for 3000 years. They cannot be talked out of that idea.
      “Thy shall perceive the world as hostile, and thyself as merely engaging in defensive action against it. Thus, thy shall be unfettered in thy aggression, whilst being as deceptive to the world as thy is to thyself. In this manner, thy shall conquer the world.”
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Primitive Communism.
Primitive Communism is a description of villages before full control by money: prior to legal maps and ownership documents, the introduction of money may have had little effect on the internal arrangements within villages. 'Primitive communism' was often ascribed to Russian villages in remote areas. It was described as 'primitive' because, of course, genuine Jewish 'communism' implied any part of it could be owned, bought, and sold.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

It's absolutely essential to distinguish financial power from ordinary capitalism. Just as it's essential to distinguish 'capital' in the money sense, from 'capital' in the capital goods sense of mines, buildings, transports and other things.
      The section on two tiers of money (above) is a long explanation. This short version points out that finance (generally regarded as high status, in awed tones) is a central bank concern, with influence going down to small local banks. Ordinary capitalists have to borrow their money, on the same basis as ordinary people.
    Typical puzzle: Everyone says capitalism is evil. But what is capitalism?
    Answer: Jews control the money system, and don't want people to believe Jews are evil. So Jewish finance is kept separate from capital. People Jews want to attack are called 'capitalists' by their media, but it's taboo to talk about Jews behind the scenes who have (for the present) ultimate control.

    Typical puzzle: Trump is a capitalist!
    Answer: 'Capitalists' deal in finance, at present controlled by Jews. Trump was/is an entrepreneur in building.

    Typical puzzle: Lenin said the way to destroy capitalism is to wreck a country's currency!
    Answer: Lenin was one of many Jewish agents operating in what was Russia. He didn't care about rich non-Jews, and murdered and robbed millions of them. But Jewish finance remained behind the scenes—Lenin did nothing about that.

    Typical puzzle: everyone knows capitalism is evil and unfair. What's the point confusing things with talk of 'financial power'? We socialists oppose all capitalism!
    Answer: If you can invent money (as the Jewish 'Federal Reserve' prints trillions of dollars) you're in a different position from people, ordinary capitalists, who have to borrow, and buy and sell, to make any profit. If you invent money you don't have to work to make money. The difference is shown by e.g. Jewish money going to arms companies before the First World War: the arms companies themselves had to sell to governments, but Jews running the Fed took no risks, apart from creating inflation as well as hoped-for deaths.
    The distinction is deliberately kept hidden from gullible people. 'Marxists' say they oppose 'capitalism', but this is a divide-and-rule strategy to set groups, typically workers against others, though in practice workers are not in much of a position to rebel. The idea is to weaken the societies, but keep firm control of Jewish money. Cromwell and the Bank of England in England, 'communists' in the USSR (Jews) preached that there should be no private property (except for Jewish finance), and so on.
    It's the same principle as learning to separate American policy from Jewish policy in the USA. It adds a bit of complication, but is essential to understanding, and not too hard.
    Typical puzzle: The total cost of any item bought on credit *must* be higher than the original price as it's the original price *plus* the interest. It's Jew lies over this simple truth that has brought the whole globe to the brink of economic catastrophe.
    Answer: You've been misdirected. Interest is not as important as the central bank Jewish swindle. For example, Jews printed and claimed to have lost about 9 trillion (million million) dollars about 2013. And you're assuming a 'dollar' is a fixed measurement, like a mile or kilo. But of course it isn't. Money as we have it at present is about as good ... as an earthworm for the measure of length, to quote H G Wells. A 1970 dollar is not the same as a 2015 dollar!
    Typical puzzle: What do you mean by saying finance is 'high status'?
    Answer: Here's an example. Bertrand Russell said he opposed capitalism (since 1898, in fact). He described them, many times, as evil men. And yet he thought financiers were amongst the most responsible groups in the world! [Speech shortly after the First World War]. Finance was by then Jewish, and Russell never had the temerity to criticise Jews. But typical capitalists—not those funded by Jews—had to struggle for their money. Russell wrote that abstraction is the key to power, and financiers 'only need to know that prices will go up or down'. The whole subject was a mystery to him, and most 'intellectuals' in the 20th century.
    Typical puzzle: Stalin hated 'Kulaks' [=tight-fisted in Russian slang] because they were capitalists and they deserved what they got!
    Answer: The Jews controlling the U.S.S.R. were left completely untouched, though there is some evidence Stalin took action against a few of them. It was only the small people who were exterminated. After the Russian property-owners. And non-Jews described as hoarders or profiteers or speculators, and other similar expressions.
    Typical puzzle: I know some Socialist Worker types, and they know perfectly well what capitalists are!Liverpool 2008 demo against sex grooming
    Answer: These people are puppets, funded, usually indirectly to conceal the trail, by Jews. And they are very careful not to reveal the source of their fraudulent funding! The parroted phrase 'currency crank' was used to shout down people trying to look into the subject of finance and Jewish control and benefit from paper money, and, now, e-money.
    Typical puzzle: A philosopher stated that the object of a company is to sell goods, but, because of complications of our social system, it is also to make a profit. Isn't that capitalism?
    Answer: Our social system has the complication that Jews take money, for many reasons: firstly to get huge repayments, secondly to buy up media and puppet politicians, thirdly to cause wars, fourthly to fund the beggar state of Israel and its weaponry. In comparison, profits are small and in any case have some positive uses.
    Typical puzzle: If Argentina doesn't want to get in legal trouble, there is a solution - don't borrow money. Just ask for a handout - that's what they really want. Boo hoo - why didn't they build the hospitals with the money they borrowed originally?
    Answer: This person has forgotten to mention that Jews give each other huge handouts, printed by Jewish control over paper money. And he's forgotten to mention there appears to be no legal solution to Jewish wars.
    Typical puzzle: Why were there historical struggles in the USA over a central bank?
    Answer: 'Capitalism' presumably represents maximising returns in some sense. It's inconsistent with a central bank run for private profit, since of course a central bank has huge advantages over ordinary businesses. This is why Jews stopped at nothing (including wars and murders) to get central banks. It's also why Jewish publications never mention these facts.
    Typical puzzle: The rich are getting richer! All the time, the rich get richer! We must have socialism!
    Answer: That phrase is used to hide the fact Jews make money by just printing it, controlling it, lending it. 'The rich' includes people who worked for it, people who inherited it, people with a stake in their country, but also parasitic Jews. Your mistake is the same as people who talk about 'American policy' without understanding Jews run the policies; they aren't 'American'.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

'Collectivism' is usually assumed to be something like the opposite of 'individualism'. There are many advantages in operating as groups; but there are disadvantages, too. Discussions on 'collectivism' however usually assume that groups have interests in common. Unsurprisingly, the 'Jewish' attitude to collectivism is not the same as the typical white or other debater. The 'Jewish' variety of collectivism is more or less secret rule by 'Jews', minimising entitlements of other.
    Typical puzzle: I read in a 1947 booklet on farming 'One aim stated in the 'Protocols of Zion' is destroying independent farmers and peasants, because of their self-sufficiency. And gaining control over all aspects of life, including food and land tenure arrangements.' But I think there are advantages in some controls over farm prices!
    Answer: Yes. The ideas of so-called 'Jews' are based exclusively around themselves. A well-thought out farming and food system has to avoid such entanglements.
    Typical puzzle: Can you point to definite disadvantages of 'collectivism'?
    Answer: One major problem is the favoritism. For example, in government housing. In Europe it goes to African and Muslim invaders. In America it goes to Asian and Hispanic invaders. In Los Angeles 70 percent of govt family housing is occupied by illegal Hispanics and south American Indians. China, Korea and other Asian countries don't really have pension and old age care. So in California most of the senior housing complexes are filled with Asian immigrants who never put a penny into the old age funds while elderly Americans who worked and contributed are banned from senior housing because they are not immigrants.
    Typical puzzle: Can you please give an example of 'Jewish collectivism'?
    Answer: 'Jewish' control of the money supply from c. 1695 kept wages so low, there was no family living wage in England. After Labour got in and instituted the reforms of 1945 workers still didn't earn a family living wage. What they got was state welfare dependency, council housing, child benefit and all the other welfare, instead of decent wages. But they were under the thumb of officials, by then controlled by 'Jews'.—that's one interpretation. Note that the welfare state allowed mass immigration to begin, after the intentions of British lawmakers were altered to include money for immigrants.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

    Typical puzzle: What exactly is 'feudalism'?
    Answer: Feudalism was a system with a fairly precise legal meaning. It was started in Burgundy; probably it was part of the recovery from the failed Roman Empire and threat of Islam. Characteristically, the version called 'Marxist' is only interested in money and does not examine any of the the ways the system operated.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Are Failed Targets Inevitable in Politics?
    Typical puzzle: "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions"
    Answer: This seems to be a popular cliché. Ask someone who says this what evidence, or examples, do they have; generally they have no reasoned argument. Possibly the phrase contains its own disproof: people with supposedly good intentions are often enough provably doing things which will not bring about their nominal intentions. Without discussing motives in general, and the difficulties in testing them, consider this alternative: "The road to Hell is paved with Jewish intentions."
    Typical puzzle: I remember a professional man saying earnestly: "Whatever governments try to do, the opposite happens!"
    Answer: Don't be deceived by lies originating from governments controlled by 'Jewish' money. Their system of 'ethics' specifically encourages lies to be told to 'goys'. The 'professional man' was remembering promises made to voters, and assumed governments had tried to carry out such policies. In fact, they had no intention of so doing—the 'Jewish' yearly kol nidre ritual specifically states that contracts, promises, oaths and so on are nullified.
    Typical puzzle: The Treaty of Versailles caused consternation; it repeated the errors of all the worst historical treaties. With incredible folly, the victorious allies set up a system which seemed almost certain to guarantee future wars... etc etc etc
    Answer: The trick in interpretation is to examine what so-called 'Jews' got out of it. Baruch, a Jew, and the Federal Reserve, run by Jews, united with the Jewish media in the USA, after 1916, to go to war with Germany. Probably the reason was to take over Russia, with the Balfour Declaration as a distraction. Whatever the case, ignoring the elephant of Jewish influence will result in misunderstanding.
Churchill poster Finish the Job nationalist governmentPaid advert to support the Jew Churchill in destroying Europe and Russia and India.
    Typical puzzle: I remember a man saying troops should be supplied and armies go to war until "Job Done". Are these people naive? He seemed very emphatic.
    Answer: Simple soldiery are not told costs of wars: Jews make money from arms factories, from currency control, from loans to governments, and want groups of goyim killed. The man you quote probably had no idea that the 'job' would continue after it was 'done' as payments, maybe for centuries, since he hadn't known Jews were not invited to fight themselves.
    Typical puzzle: In about 1970, Barbara Ward caused a stir by pointing out that a high percentage of people alive at the time had no access to clean drinking water. Now, in 2015, I see Bill Gates is promoting some water scheme in Ghana, which seems to have sewage everywhere. Has nothing happened in 50 years?
    Answer: Probably nobody intended to do anything unless money could be made from it. Probably the huge size of Africa made it impossible to provide pipes and equipment. Probably no studies were made into the possibilities of options better suited to Africa. Probably African IQs and skills weren't up to the task. Probably Jews controlling money, diverted some of their torrent of paper into 'think tanks' intended to damage whites, by funding loudmouth types and BBC journalist types who were completely incompetent to judge such technical issues.—look into such hypotheses before assuming there was any planned intention to act.
    Typical puzzle: I take people as I find them. I am not judgmental. I am definitely not a racist. And yet blacks and other aliens seem to cause endless trouble.
    Answer: You seem to have been misled. It can take many years to assess people. People may surprise you after a lifetime in their company. It is not easy to predict people, as any 'human resources' interviewer will tell you. If you don't know about a group's history, or deep attitudes which may go back centuries or millennia, you are likely to be surprised. Jews are a perfect example: after some centuries, many people still can't begin to understand them.
    Typical puzzle: I've just read this: "humanitarian" interventions generally make things worse. True?
    Answer: There have been many humanitarian interventions: support of children, piped water, pensions, 'free' education, libraries. The author of that statement probably failed to notice that under Jewish media control, "humanitarian" usually means something most Jews want, for example wars. Naturally, such intervention makes things worse for victims.
    Typical puzzle: The whole history of Britain's welfare state proves that politicians never make their targets! There is a housing shortage! We are in debt! They are liars! We need free markets!
    Answer: The 'Welfare State' with council housing and the NHS was established mostly in 1948, by the 'Labour' government. The Labour Party was set up by Jews; it was not infiltrated in the way the Conservative Party was. Note that the entire population of the ex-empire was given the 'right' to move to Britain. Although many people assumed the welfare state was for the benefit of Britons; in fact it seems certain it was arranged by Jews to give immigrants housing, healthcare, unemployment benefits and the rest. From their harming point of view, it was successful, with British people having problems with housing, health and so on. In short, the promises were deliberate lies—as you say.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Foreign Aid.
Many people still think (or rather, fail to think) that 'Foreign Aid' as a generous free gift is a Jewish propaganda lie. A comment in The Occidental Observer—a commentator said trillions have gone in foreign aid, and there are no thank-you letters—prompted this comment. Luxurious buildings for foreign 'elites', weapons and military equipment and military infrastructure, torture equipment, propaganda, profitable future orders, broadcasting equipment for propaganda, educational institutions which are no help to the recipient countries, dumped agricultural and other products including pollutants—these are the things to be reasonably expected.
      It's fascinating to compare all this with missionary activities in times where Christianity was more expansive.
    Example? Here's the Occidental Observer (2016-06-18) on Jo Cox, a northern England woman MP who ignored Muslim attacks on white children in northern England. She was reportedly murdered, though this was no doubt a fake:
The role of international aid worker is highly valued among a section of shrewd university-educated females. It offers a particularly attractive combination of a good salary in an expanding sector, frequent foreign travel and high status among the do-gooding circles.
      And then there was her husband Brendan Cox, who is also an international development consultant. While one can have all the sympathy in the world for someone left to bring up two children on his own, it would be remiss of me not to point out that he has had a rocky career in the development field. He was forced out of a position at the Save the Children Fund after several women accused him of “acting inappropriately”; acutely embarrassing no doubt for a wife who was the “equalities and discrimination advisor” for a Labour Women’s Network.
      He has since been jetting around Europe for the World Economic Forum. He is examining ways to combat the “populist opposition” to the “refugee” population transfer programme. Among his findings are that the vote for nationalist parties is not important and that European populations are still willing to take in far more refugees.

I've myself met this type of 'educated' woman, in about 1980. She admired Lenin, and the supposed ignition point of the (((Russian))) Revolution, Iskra, the Spark, a newssheet or propaganda thing. Meanwhile, most of the Indian population defecate in fields; nothing much has changed, and what change there is, is imported technology, not the work of Jews and their subservients.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Individualism has a longish etymological history back to a theological meaning of not being divisible, then moving through the biological idea of one individual as against a species. The Horatio Alger/Samuel Smiles mid-to-late 19th-century books illustrate the modern idea of economic individualism. I'm inclined to think this ideal was yet another diversion from the fact that secret groups were operating behind the scenes, in a unified way. It's often been noted that Americans are convinced they are individualistic, and yet most of them are indistinguishable in ideas and outlook and lack of awareness.
    'Individualism' is also a method of avoiding biological issues going back through time, such as race and Jewish race ideology. Every person is, obviously, the resultant of countless ancestors and their activities. Everything from the skeleton and blood circulation, to brain and spinal cord structure, is determined by genetics. Minimising the effects of evolution by pretending people are isolated and unique is another aspect of the deforming nonsense partly attributable to Jews.
    Typical puzzle: Free Inquiry and Science is a noble ideal, worth working for, isn't it? The pursuit of truth, finding nature's mysteries, decoding the awe-inspiring majesty of the universe? Many great scientists and inventors made their own way against neglect and criticism, and they were very great men, weren't they!
    Answer: Yes, they were. But arguably the ideology has been eroded: the policy now is to get original work done free, but as employees. Now, such people get no benefit. Instead, corporations may get patent rights. It's merely an idea put across to try to persuade creative people to do their work for as little as possible.
    Typical puzzle: Free Competition and the Free World made America what it is! Liberty is the greatest good! The USA IS the greatest country in the world! Isn't it true America is the land of freedom and individualism?
    Answer: This is largely myth. When the frontier was being settled, large numbers of people set out with wagons, horses, supplies. if you think about it, all these things had to be supplied to them. This would not have been done without some forward planning and an eye on returns. Many modern Americans are gullible! But there is a lot of truth in the Victorian idea that free competition, in ideas in particular, leads to progress. But Jews, because of their domination of paper and other token money, do not offer free competition, and show no desire for it at all. If they did, they would not want to control money. As for freedom, Jews simply don't understand the word—their whole clannish tribalism opposes 'freedom', except in the sense they like freedom to make money, and freedom to exploit.
    As for the frontier in the US, here's a review of a book of essays casting doubt on the individualistic freedom idea.
    Typical puzzle: Surely 'freedom' is an ideal to be pursued? Is the word being misused?
    Answer: Yes; it's misused. The word 'freedom' has been deformed by Jews, through the media. 'Free enquiry' and 'free expression' of course are absolute anathema to them. 'Free enterprise' is OK for Jews controlling money, because they can buy out anything promising that emerges: freedom to make more money. 'Freedom' in any abstract sense means nothing to them; they want to live as a race-based unified tribe.
    Typical puzzle: Jews are Individuals! When you get two Jews, you get three opinions!! They are so different from each other!!!
    Answer: The psychology seems to be that Jews knuckle under to Jewish money power, every time, every single time, as they presumably did for generations under Rabbis. A Jew such as (e.g) the head of the BBC, or Attorney General, or Cabinet Minister may appear a successful man of the world to people unaware of how they got into these positions. But, presumably, summoned to the equivalent of a family meeting, they seem always to defer to decisions made my an inner circle. Otherwise, it's impossible to explain how they adhere to absurd beliefs and absurd policies. The claim they continually argue is just another lie.
    This may well turn out to be genetic.
    Direct me to original research by Jews condemning the Fed, condemning Jewish mass murders in the USSR, condemning the Holohoax fraud, condemning Kissinger's mass murders, condemning Jews in Palestine, condemning Jews and the slave trade, condemning Jewish media lies on black violence, condemning the Jewish 'holy books', condemning white demonisation, condemning Jewish financial frauds, condemning the Jews involved in 9/11, condemning Jews and sex trafficking, etc. If there are so many decent Jews, you'll have no difficulty finding plenty of examples, will you? [Youtube comment]
    Typical puzzle: Seeking Power is natural to humans; isn't that clear proof of individualist motivation working on individuals?
    Answer: It's tempting to think so, but in fact many 'power-seeking' individuals do not, and did not in the past, operate as individuals. Consider for example Churchill, both Clintons, Tony Blair, and Barry Soetero. They were bought-out puppets, with something like zero scope for their own convictions, if indeed they'd ever had any.
    Typical puzzle: It seems perfectly clear that people have to act together sometimes, but also are individuals, even if it's hard to pin down the boundaries. Why do so many put such emphasis on 'individualism'?
    Answer: A possible clue: it may encourage people to support some group. According to Christian ethics, no State necessity can justify the authorities in compelling a man to perform a sinful action. The Church holds that a marriage is null if either party is subject to compulsion. Even in persecution the theory is still individualistic: the purpose is to lead the individual heretic to recantation and repentance, rather than to effect a benefit to the community. Kant's principle, that each man is an end in himself, is derived from Christian teaching.—in these examples, the 'individualism' consists in supporting the Church no matter what evil, or good, has been done.
    Typical puzzle: The American way is individualism! Throughout the hard times, we Americans worked hard. I'm proud of what we achieved, even if we don't seem to have as much as we deserve.
    Answer: It has to be said that working as a small group, a family say, keeps people away from big issues. People who worked in the way you say got into wars they didn't understand, were ripped off in ways they didn't understand, were manipulated and propagandised. It has proven to be essential to do something about the big picture, not just get your head down.

    Typical puzzle: I am endowed by my Creator with certain inalienable rights, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Believing that people should be free to associate with whom they choose, as opposed to with whom the state permits, makes me an American.
    Answer: You appear to be claiming that you were 'created', and that you are entitled to claim life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (if not actual happiness). You may find the hard way that these 'rights' certainly are 'alienable'.
      And the fact is the territory you occupy was given by governments who wanted the land settled cheaply. They hit on the idea of praising independence, liberty, freedom of action, etc. But all the ideas, food, clothing, tools, building styles, carts, pretty much everything, (including Jewish superstitions), was not invented by them. You see bumper stickers saying 'I served 3 tours in Iraq. Now homeless'. Americans have been used as thugs around the world. Now it's intentionally being put at risk by Jews.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

'Left' vs 'Right' is possibly the clearest example of 'divide and conquer' as a Jewish strategy. The origin of the name (from seating arrangements during the 'French Revolution') is a well-known symbol, though the symbolism isn't well understood. In aristocratic times, the aristocracy could be presented as rich even if they were heavily mortgaged, had land low in assets, and were liable to be thrown out if they backed the wrong side or were overtaken in the hereditary pecking-order. The workers and/or peasants could be presented as oppressed, downtrodden and so on, irrespective of the details of their lives. With economic development, the inevitable middle classes may be presented in various ways, more or less flattering. However in each case the Jewish aim is to secretly cause strife, and get assets into Jewish ownership. If the goyim kill each other in the process, so much the better.
      A slow-motion version occurred in the USA after the Fed in 1913. Heavily-controlled Jewish media pretended that Republicans and Democrats were very different: in fact both were Jew controlled. Neither did anything about the Depression. Both supported the Second World War and future wars.
      Under 'Labour' (the name conceals the Jewish control) English aristocrats, insofar as any remained, were mostly erased by taxation and death-duties (note the phrase!) and the 'Great War'; the Upper Middle Classes (as in Galsworthy) were destroyed and replaced by Jews, mainly I think though the impoverishment of the 'Great War'
In all these cases, Jewish interests are censored out completely.
      'Thatcherism' and 'Reaganism' were intended to get public assets into Jewish ownership; understandable, as paper money is worthless without armed support.
      'Leftism' in US Jew propaganda is the pretence that Jewish fixed ideas are socialist or democratic.
    Typical puzzle: Give an example of how it can be that causing strife leads to planned Jewish expropriation.
    Answer: The Jews in Russia after the coup illustrate all these points: the old Russian aristocracy was murdered and robbed; the middle classes lost their gold, gems, houses; the peasants lost their land. Jews in the US and maybe Germany wanted their money back...
    Typical puzzle: What does 'extreme right' mean?
    Answer: The 'British' 'Labour Party' in the 1930s decided Hitler was 'extreme right' or 'far right', because they could not admit the NSDAP ('National Socialist German Workers Party') was serious about workers' rights. Because Jewish propaganda was overwhelming, no other interpretation was allowed.
      (At that time, Attlee nominally led the British Labour Party. He became Prime Minister from 1945-1951, and his activities included censorship of the USSR, the National Health Service and National Assistance and the Nationality Act, paving the way to nonwhite immigration, joining the fake nuclear race, giving Jews ex-Empire assets, and a fake nationalisation of the Bank of England).
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Jewish Characteristics
Brief overview of typical Jewish behaviour patterns.
    Typical puzzle: Do Jews have policies they can be identified by?
    Answer: es. Because Jews are accustomed to working in groups which look indigenous, but in fact think they are Jewish, they can repeat techniques which they found successful. An example is laws designed to keep Jewish activities secret; in Britain, these were called 'race relations' laws, promoted by the 'Board of Deputies of British Jews'. Lady Birdwood explained this in 1991. Similar censorship laws are being proposed in South Africa, in 2017, again by the Jewish board of deputies, in South Africa. Laws on the 'same sex marriage' absurdity, laws on buying and selling gold, laws on abortion, laws on the 'Holocaust' fraud, are a few other examples, selected from many.
    Typical puzzle: Can Jews be useful citizens?
    Answer: The problem is that they are like dangerous cells waiting to be activated, or time-bombs waiting to go off on some signal. The 9/11 Jewish media co-operation is a perfect example of Jews concocting a fraud and all sticking together to support it.
    Typical puzzle: What's the truth of the 'wandering Jew' idea?
    Answer: Jews have spread in a way that can be compared with some parasites, sending a thread into a new place, supporting it from the older location, and building it up into a new parasitic colony.
    Typical puzzle: Since about 1970 I have noticed repetition of 'the Holocaust', in a sense applied to Jews—not Armenians, not war victims, not starved Indians, not massacred blacks, not Vietnamese or Iraqis. 'Ann Frank' is heavily promoted, for example by the Dutch and by Penguin books. There are expensive 'holocaust museums' in many cities, not just capitals. And yet there are no films or novels of (for example) Russians and Ukrainians massacred by Jews, or other victims, such as Europeans and Americans killed in wars in Europe.
    Answer: Yes, true. Jews do this, and probably are aiming to found a new religion, 'Holocaustianity', with fake shrines, saints, liturgies, memorials, Rabbis as equivalent to Cardinals and vicars, and a central fantasy of 6 million, replacing the earlier Jewish central fantasy of Yeshua (Jesus). And of course large amounts of money.
    Typical puzzle: Why does the Jewish media ignore murders, rape, financial crimes, even wars?
    Answer: Jewish 'ethics' as in the Talmud and other works lay all stress and significance on Jews. Non-Jews ('Gentiles', 'Goyim', 'Shiksas' etc) are regarded as expendable, and Jewish 'ethics' says it's fine to kill them, at least if they are undetected. Poisoning, assassinations, hired thugs and entire subservient armies are typical means.
    Typical puzzle: Are there other Jewish attitudes which aren't noticed by most people?
    Answer: An important attitude, easy to omit, is that Jews think they are entitled to live in white lands. Many Jews have invaded European and American countries under false pretences, regarding this as normal.
    Typical puzzle: Jews hate whites. Is this sane?
    Answer: If you want a simple analogy, imagine Western White Civilisation as a car; a Jew is at the wheel, and we current living goyim are passengers in the back seat. The driver is headed toward a cliff. Our problem: we don't have a rational figure at the wheel, but a clever psychopath. As we plummet over the cliff, we realize our chauffeur is going to die right along with us, but all we can hear is his maniacal, hate-filled laughter. [From 'The Occidental Observer'. It omits the fact that many whites participate in Jewish psychopathy.]
    Typical puzzle: Whites have fought all the biggest wars: Napoleon, US Civil War, First World War, Second World War. Nobody else is in the same category.
    Answer: True, but this ignores the facts of Jewish activity. For example, the Federal Reserve and Jews corrupting President Wilson got the USA into the First World War. The Second World War would not have been fought without Stalin, who was a puppet of Jews. Churchill brought Britain and the USA into the Second World War, by various lies and deceptions. However this does show whites can be gullible, and evil, and may serve the wrong masters. The best explanation seems to be that some of the work done by whites is demanding, so little scope is left for oversight—if whites assume others are honest, which possibly happened in early tribes, they can be deceived. Jews, acting in unison as a parasitic column, may replace the natural genetic white leaders.
    Typical puzzle: Are all Jews acting together?
    Answer: Jews must be assumed to be hostile. Their very presence is the problem. Their tendency to prey upon Gentile hosts eventually causes the population they are preying upon to respond with violence against them. Until they police their own and take down the ADL, SPLC, AIPAC, Federal Reserve etc, don't be deluded by the myth of the "good Jew". Jews chose to live apart; very well. Let them. They started war on 'Gentiles'. Let them be finished.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Nations and Nationalism
'Nations' provide another example of the way Jews use protective mimicry in order to secretly parasitise their hosts. Jewish 'neocons' pose as 'American'; Jewish politicians in Britain pose as 'British'; Jews in France (such as Sarkozy) pretend to be French; and there are innumerable other types: 'Hungarians', 'Poles', 'Russians', 'Rumanians'.
    Typical puzzle: Why would Jews go to the trouble of disguising themselves as members of other nations? Why the hard work?
    Answer: If they can change the policies of nations, they can benefit. Typically, and most importantly, they can work for wars which they want, but the hosts get no benefit. This may need years of propaganda preparation. For example, in Britain, in the 1930s, almost all books and newspapers and the BBC promoted war with Germany; Britons were surrounded by anti-German propaganda, almost all in one direction. Most Britons simply had no idea they were being systematically lied to; and of course this situation still applies to many people worldwide.
    Typical puzzle: Some'nationalist' groups wave Israeli flags and say they support Israel. What on earth does this have to do with nationalist beliefs in, say, France, the USA, Australia... many countries?
    Answer: Of course they aren't nationalists. They are part of the Jewish alliance with fellow-travellers, traitors, collaborators, or whatever you want to call them, and also warmongers and sadists. For example, some of these groups have fake think-tanks supporting immigration—Mexicans into the USA, Pakistanis into Britain, Algerian Muslims into France, third-worlders into Australia. They pretend to be nationalists to hide their motive, which is to control or destroy these countries, which are typically white.
    Typical puzzle: Isn't 'nationalism' potentially dangerous? If nations are rigid and confrontational, isn't there a risk of wars between them? Doesn't the whole history of nationalism (starting perhaps with Chauvin in France) show nationalism is a threat to the world?
    Answer: It's true that nations can be a menace, and in my view nationalists should not use nationalism as a boost to wars. Arguably this is a leftover from Jewish-promoted wars. However, historically, the reason for wars has often been that they served Jewish interests: consider the opium wars, and the Boer Wars, for example. And wars where Jews made money: both the First and Second World Wars, and the Vietnam War, are examples. If there had been genuine nationalism as the primary motive it's unlikely these wars would even have been fought.
    Typical puzzle: Well, here's an actual quotation from the 1930s:'Intelligent people perceive that nationalism is ruining Europe'
    Answer: Even at the time, that was an astonishingly short-sighted comment. The main driving force ruining Europe—and Russia, as the USSR; and the USA—was Jews, then just as now.
    Typical puzzle: My history textbook says that there was an 'Age of Nationalism'. Nations seem to have been defined, or even invented. Why should this have happened? Was it language? Travel? The printed word? Religion? Economic efficiency? What was new?
    Answer: One of the factors was the use by Jews of divide-and-rule tactics. If they could persuade e.g. people in France and people in Germany to fight, then inflaming feelings by propaganda is a good way to do it. Probably the 'Age of Nationalism' is related to the rise of secret Jewish influence.
    Typical puzzle: What about more recent times; since 1945, say?
    Answer: Yes. More nations have been invented than ever before, at least nominally. Don't forget Pakistan (established 1948; in the same year as Israel, in fact), the name being made-up from abbreviations. And what was Bengal, then East Pakistan, now called Bangla Desh. And India, which used to be a patchwork of small kingdoms and princedoms and other structures. Criticism of 'nationalism' is generally in an anti-white sense.
    Typical puzzle: Some areas (such as eastern Europe) have long traditions of wars and are a sort of chessboard of nations, some of them somewhat genuine, some manufactured. Isn't this a difficult situation?
    Answer: Yes. Also in Ireland. In eastern Europe gipsies complicate things. Poland has a complicated history. There have been Islamic incursions, mass murders by Turks, and so on. Many of these people regard nationalism in ways which are easily inflamed, expecially by secret operatons. British empire failure left many regions split up, e.g. India and Muslim areas, Cyprus, Rhodesia. Expect local groups to mean, by 'nationalist', such things as support for local monarchs, and churches, and other things. The Occidental Observer (online) often hosts such material. Usually of course Jews are and have been the main problem.

    National Characteristics provide interesting examples of Jewish corruption, enabled through straddling across other groups of people. It used to be said that the French are 'logical', and carry logic to extremes; more recently, the French have been called 'cheese-eating surrender monkeys' by Jews in America. Very likely 'logical' meant that Jews in France presented their frauds in a way that made them appear to be 'logical', and of course the other description is applied because of reluctance to be killed assisting Jewish frauds. The British used to be called 'empirical'; probably meaning that mostly they rejected Marxism and other Jewish rubbish, but would in practice do what Jews told them. Americans are presented as 'racist' small-town hicks, or dangerously violent, depending on what Jewish processes are being wheeled out. Japanese and Germans have been, of course, presented as violently cruel, partly to make allies out of gullible Anglo-Saxons, and partly to hide enormous Jewish crimes. I've been met with incredulity, when I pointed out in Bertrand Russell writings, that the Chinese were loveable and happy, and something like Oscar Wilde, caught in a machine that cares nothing for human values; and that a civilised Chinese is the most civilised man on earth.
    Typical puzzle: Why can't everyone just get along? Why can't you take people as you find them? I judge people just as they are! Why be horrible to harmless people? We all bleed red!
    Answer: The fact is it can take years, decades, or centuries to understand other people. In particular, 'Jews' so-called are expert at concealment. Their attitudes and ideas, though incorporated in their writings, have been untranslated and kept secret for centuries, perhaps for thousands of years. This is why it is necessary to investigate and understand Jews, and it is not a simple or pleasant process.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

'Patriotism' traditionally had meanings related to fathers of families, paternal feelings, and their extension to feelings in favour of larger groups, presumably related. This of course lends itself to forms of propaganda persuasion. 'Patriotism' can be invoked to persuade people to take part in wars, for example. Or to pretend that some groups belong to a group or nation when they don't. Or to help unify people, as in ancient Rome - Civis Romanus sum.
    Typical puzzle: Here's an extract from a serious on-line source: '... it's quite odd to find a fraternity that does things like spitting on wounded U.S. military veterans and throwing beer bottles at them. Or tearing American flags off cars of military veterans and urinating on them. ... Jews have no loyalty to the nations of the diaspora—given the contempt shown for the symbols of American patriotism. ...' What on earth is going on?
    Answer: Many people are easily led by patriotic claims; and usually of course all the local or national media unite in telling the same story to the same people. But just because (say) an army is called 'The US Army' doesn't mean it is patriotic; at the present time, Jews control most US military action. It's a typical example of Jews infiltrating an organisation and partly or wholly taking over its functions.
    Typical puzzle: Any good example of misused 'patriotism'?
    Answer: John Stuart Mill's Autobiography has this: '... when I came to the American War, I took my part, like a child as I was (until set right by my father) on the wrong side, because it was called the English side. ..' Mill was born in 1806, and therefore aged about six in 1812. The English side went to war with the United States. It's unlikely either Mill's father or Mill himself knew why. But both supported United States independence.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

    Typical puzzle: I keep seeing a party saying it's become more 'populist', even though it's not called that!
    Answer: Yes. When a party controlled by Jews more or less secretly, describes itself as populist, it means it's pretending to take a position voters want, on controlling invasion by foreign invaders. You can tell they're phoney because they all favour Israel as exclusively for Jews, not wanting Israel enriched by foreigners. It could be called Kosher populism.
    Typical puzzle: The media seems afraid of people democratically voting the way they want!
    Answer: Yes. 'Democracy' was introduced on the understanding that people's views were easy to control—the BBC in Britain, CNN in the USA, show how. Their views are described as 'populist', without risking discussion.
    Typical puzzle: Why are some voters described as 'populists'?
    Answer: Because they don't want uneducated Africans or violent Muslims or superstitious middle-easterners in their country any more. It's a variant of calling them 'nazi', 'anti-Semitic', 'racist' or other expressions which have been used in the past by hostile 'elites'.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

    Typical puzzle: I keep seeing groups advertised in the Jewish media (Whites Don't Count, Jews are Non-Race Racists, Queers are Not Queer, Fuck the Pope, I Own My Tits) as 'progressive' Why is this?
    Answer: The joke comments show how Jew propagandists take over, from some already existing split in non-Jews. 'Progressive' probably had some Victorian meaning. By infinite repetition, anything can be claimed by Jews to be 'progressive'.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Protests, Demonstrations and 'Spontaneous Demonstrations'
    Typical puzzle: I can remember demonstrators (marchers, or static groups, with banners and signs) in many events. (1) Dockworkers in London who wanted no coloured immigration, being countered by violent demonstrators; (2) women in the countryside, protesting against what they were told were nuclear cruise missiles; (3) groups, including George Galloway, trying to silence David Irving and also Nick Griffin, in Oxford; (4) 'Black Lives Matter' protestors in the USA chanting 'put the gun down', supporting a black killer, and supported by the Jewish-owned media; (5) apparently white women, 'welcoming the stranger'; (6) northern English people protesting in favour of Muslim rapists; (7) homosexuals protesting in favour of men wanting their genitals amputated. Do these events have anything in common? What is going on here?
    Answer: Anything in common? Yes. Almost all these demonstrations are staged by Jews and their confederates, such as Freemason and Common Purpose groups, unemployables needing money or drugs. Jews own most of the non-Internet media, and are able not to report anything truthful which they dislike. They can put anything they like into 'news' sources, such as the Jew York Times and BBC, in some cases over many years. Jews largely control Parliaments, and hence their laws, and can join staged campaigns of various types. Taking those examples,
    (1) Jews wanted coloured immigration, at first into cities in white countries, so they organised demonstrations against—and probably demonstrations for, as well to show genuine dockworkers what they'd get. Then the Jewish-run BBC, government departments, and printed media would stage interviews on such subjects as 'racism', how Britain has always had immigrants, and all the rest of it.
    (2) The nuclear issue is a long-term project to pretend nuclear weapons exist; both sides need to be funded, and the quasi-industries themselves absorbed vast amounts of money, for nothing apart from scares.
    (3) Part of the Jewish post-1945 secret consensus is of course the Holocaust fake. George Galloway is a long-term supporter of Jews, and presumably therefore mass murder of Russians in the USSR. Naturally he is on hand to try to suppress debate on Jewish crimes.
    (4) Many people by now have realised that George Soros, and/or other Jews, pay 'activists' to parrot slogans and wear disguise etc to support 'Black Lives Matter', a US loose organisation which is unintellectual and anti-white. They often wear disguise, and US police, must have been ordered to allow them not to be identified.
    (5) Jews all support the invasion of white countries by low-intelligence blacks. They turn out with paid-for banners, and the media and police are ordered to leave them alone, by Jews such as 'Jack Straw', one-time Home Secretary. (6), (7) etc—And so on; the same sort of activity has occurred in Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries, the USA from about 1900, Cable Street in London, and of course in Jewish parts of Europe and Russia from 1905, 1917, and so on. Even the Suffragettes were used in these ways as part of the push for the First World War.
    Typical puzzle: Isn't there a genuine right to demonstrate?
    Answer: The problem is that other demonstrations are not reported by the Jewish media; before Internet, most people could have had no idea they were happening. For example, there have been genuine peace movements, but these are not reported. Medical incompetence, abortion, international frauds and violence, are some topics where demonstrators have been unreported, or attacked, or jailed. Some Jewish-funded thugs wear face coverings; again, police must have been instructed not to identify them.
    Typical puzzle: 'Spontaneous Demonstrations'?
    Answer: "Let's have a spontaneous demonstration" is a phrase I remember from the first Iraq War phase. Spoken with a straight face, it is a typical Jew construction.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Extremism is a description useful in preventing thought about unfamiliar attitudes. Here's an example: The British dislike Nazis, not because they know about them, or have studied them, but because the British way of life is not, and has never been, extreme. This is a fairly familiar line of argument, probably derived from the media and its earlier equivalents, such as schoolmasters and ministers and rectors; some Americans use the argument too. The problem is that is simply isn't true. The British—or if you prefer (((British)))—have on occasion carried out extreme actions, such as blockading Germany after the First World War, and, it seems, starving a few million Germans to death. There are plenty of such examples.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Free Speech is another slogan taken over and perverted by Jews.
    Typical puzzle: The fights at Berkeley over Yiannopoulos drew a withering criticism of Milo Yiannopoulos [half-Greek Jew]. from 'veterans' of the 1960's free speech movement. What's going on?
    Answer: In the 1960s, Jews wanted to control 'free speech' so that discussion of US genocide in Vietnam, and the complicity of Kinninger and others, would not be dicussed. Simialarly of course with 9/11. In this case, look at the names of the 'Free Speech Movement Archive Board of Directors': Robert Cohen, Bettina Aptheker, Susan Druding, Lee Felsenstein, Barbara Garson, Jackie Goldberg, Lynne Hollander Savio, Steve Lustig, Anita Medal, Jack Radey, Gar Smith, Barbara Stack.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

'Liberalism' traditionally had meanings related to freedom, laissez-faire, non-intervention, small government, and so on.  There was some hypocrisy in this: 'free trade' in a world of British and U.S. industry meant these countries had little to lose, and a lot to gain, from 'liberal' policies—they hated the German Zollverein for example.  And as technology cut down distances, economies of scale led to numbers of competent people being sidelined.  By 1900, 'liberalism' was coming to mean what it now does in Jewish media—a collection of attitudes which Jews collectively imagine work to their advantage.
    Typical puzzle: 'liberals' say they favour unlimited illegal immigration, freeing of dangerous criminals, porn, wars against third-world countries, big business and many other things; what on earth is going on?
    Answer: Of course they aren't traditional liberals at all, who were concerned with the workings of whole societies, as outlined above, and believed in maximising freedom when possible.  Modern 'liberalism' is a euphemism for allowing Jews to do what they like.  For example,'liberal' policy is to get public assets into Jewish hands, using their top-tier control of money, and pretending this is the result of free competition.
    Typical puzzle: What does ‘Free Trade’ really mean?
    Answer: Here's a real-life example. Trump told audiences in 2016 that trade negotiators were stupid, and made bad deals. But they made good deals—for Jews. American trade representatives played their cards this way: You prosecute CD pirates, we give you a sawmill from Oregon. You enforce copyrights, we give you a carpet mill from North Carolina. You allow Wall Street to handle your bond issues, we give you a shoe factory from Maine. Trade deals have nothing to do with Free Trade. They are Managed Trade. The deals had give and take—but White Christian Americans gave, and Hollywood moguls and Manhattan Madoffs took. For decades all trade deals fattened parasites and drained the blood from producers.
    Even the economics textbook idea of free trade (exchanging one set of commodities for another) is not in practice permitted, as the National Socialists proved, after trading without a financial intermediary in the 1930s. So 'free trade' is just another unanalysed phrase, like 'capitalism'. A country may be forced to take cigarettes to sell to its inhabitants; or made to close museums showing war crimes.
    Typical puzzle: Can you give an example of what traditional liberalism meant, and how you think Jews corrupted it?
    Answer: It had little to do with politics, although there was a 'Liberal' Party. To illustrate the attitude, here's Bertrand Russell in 1951. This is his 'liberal decalogue':
1. Do not feel absolutely certain of anything.
2. Do not think it worth while to proceed by concealing evidence, for the evidence is sure to come to light.
3. Never try to discourage thinking, for you are sure to succeed.
4. When you meet with opposition, even if it should be from your husband or your children, endeavor to overcome it by argument and not by authority, for a victory dependent upon authority is unreal and illusory.
5. Have no respect for the authority of others, for there are always contrary authorities to be found.
6. Do not use power to suppress opinions you think pernicious, for if you do the opinions will suppress you.
7. Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.
8. Find more pleasure in intelligent dissent that in passive agreement, for, if you value intelligence as you should, the former implies a deeper agreement than the latter.
9. Be scrupulously truthful, even if the truth is inconvenient, for it is more inconvenient when you try to conceal it.
10. Do not feel envious of the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise, for only a fool will think that it is happiness.
    It's easy to see how this outlook could be manipulated by groups with no concern for truth. They need only assume those words are from someone hopelessly naive, as in fact Bertrand Russell was.
    Typical puzzle: How is it that Liberalism, getting more and more into power, has grown more and more coercive in its legislation?
    Answer: The question is from Herbert Spencer. He didn't understand the issue of Jewish secret power, expanding to carry out its own secret plans.
    Typical puzzle: I still can't see why liberalism has led to present-day riots, wars, controls over information, and general problems. Surely liberal freedom still has policing held in reserve?
    Answer: It's just another Jewish issue. Jews favour freedom and a hands-off approach when it comes to changing their names, carrying out frauds, following long-term policies of lying, getting low sentences for crimes, and all the rest of the familiar Jewish-media policies. But they don't like liberalism for Africans moving to Israel, free speech in investigating Jewish crimes such as 9/11 and the Liberty and wars in Iraq. Jews like liberalism, but only for themselves.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Conservatism.  In Britain, one of the unremarked influences post-Cromwell is the infiltration of the landed aristocracy, once a serious part of the British environment, by Jews.  (Mentioned for example in Belloc's book The Jews). The result is that 'conservatism' has mutated in meaning, probably more than any other political term.
    Typical puzzle: In the 19th century, Britain had Conservatives ('Tories') and Liberals ('Whigs'). What's a revisionist re-interpretation of these expressions?
    Answer: At the time, only a small proportion of people had a vote. And this was after the Napoleonic Wars, which brought impoverishment as a result of the wars themselves and the loans which the Rothschilds seemed able to enforce. Here's a typical interpretation omitting finance: 'The duel of landlord and manufacturer 1838-1847: Landowners befriended wage earners in towns, and industrialists befriended those in the country. Between the two, Factory Acts were passed and the Corn Laws were repealed.' Probably the main movement was the move towards what was called 'democracy', where control of information given to people with little direct knowledge of they things were done, enabled traditional aristocrats to be subverted, but in directions Jews wanted.
    Typical puzzle: The Jew Prime Minister Cameron says conservatives favour 'same sex marriage'!  What on earth is going on here?
    Answer: Jews like perversions; for example their supposed holy books say sex with little girls is acceptable. Their word for non-Jewish women means'whores''Same sex marriage' is of course not 'conservative' at all, but is part of the Jewish control over beliefs and ideas.
    Typical puzzle: It's often said that people often vote conservative, against their economic interests. For example, workers vote for rich people, because these people buy luxuries. Any comment?
    Answer: That's true. What's less often said is that they may vote for war, destruction, international theft and so on, often enough through carefully-controlled lies.
    Typical puzzle: After 1945 there was a huge push to remove capital punishment.  Why would there be such excitement over such a small problem? The were far more road deaths than murders!
    Answer: This is another Jewish-promoted move.  Obviously, Jews had wanted German leaders killed without trial, so they could give no evidence; this helped later with the colossal 'Holohoax' lie. At the same time they had no intention that Jewish mass murderers in the USSR should be punished.  Their opposition to the death penalty was and is a total fraud.  However, they must have considered that the damage done to white societies by freeing murderers and rapists was in their interest.
    Typical puzzle: What's a 'cuckservative'?
    Answer: This is an American expression (mid 2015) for white voters who vote against their racial interests, generally because of the Jewish control of the U.S. political parties. The 'cuck' prefix refers to cuckoos or cuckolds.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Planned Economy.  Just another phrase to avoid real issues. It was introduced after the Jewish coup in Russia. It meant 'Jewish-run economy'. Obviously, the 'Russian' economy was under the control of Jews. They called the resulting mess 'planned', and had the option of pretending their 'plan' would produce huge prosperity–in future. Other Jews made fun of the idea, for example Hayek, saying in effect that a 'free market' was needed because any economy is so fantastically complex. The 'free market' would be controlled by Jewish money, but this lack of freedom was not mentioned. No doubt markets exist; the question of 'freedom' is another matter.
    Typical puzzle: Why did 'planned economy' sound so new and original after the First World War? Many economists were enraged at the idea.
    Answer: Jewish Combines, disguised as national industries, wanted large-scale theft of native property in every country. Jewish fifth columns 'nationalised' industries, putting irresponsible Jews in position of power. This was called 'planning'.
    Typical puzzle: Why was there a huge propaganda battle over the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion'?
    Answer: Quite apart from the Jewish issue, there was the question of secret plans. (For example, the otherwise-unknown Albert Pike in the USA has had complex plans attributed to him). This must be related to the growth of technology and the facts of transport, raw materials, and so on, which made economies of scale possible, and necessary. Many processes need skilled people and controlled conditions to be workable. The Jewish instinctive feel must have been to get control of planning processes for their own ends. One technique is simply to ignore or ridicule other peoples' plans; 'laissez faire' was an appropriate and vague slogan for that purpose.
    Typical puzzle: Are there hidden implications in the idea of planning?
    Answer: It can be used as a fantasy; 'the best is yet to come' sense—this was written in 1944 (a 'Penguin Special' by Horrabin): In peace as to-day, in the midst of war, the Soviet citizen is prepared to face the most bitter deprivations because he knows that all suffer alike, and when abundance comes it will be created for the people and not for narrow ruling classes.
    Typical puzzle: 'Planning' sounds healthy and progressive. But can plans be harmful to some groups of people?
    Answer: Yes. For example, the 'Great Depression' was probably planned (as Lindbergh predicted). Credit and money were deliberately enlarged, then throttled, so that assets such as farms and shops dependent on sales could bankrupted and bought up (at 'fire sale prices'). Plans can include secret war plans. Possibly the biggest secretly planned fraud was the series of Jewish 'nuclear' frauds.
      The most convincing debunking of the ‘New Deal’ idea (and the related promotion of fake media excitements) known to me is Josh G's article on Smedley Butler and Roosevelt, the Great Depression, Warburg and others, in Miles Mathis's website.
    Typical puzzle: Granted that the USSR was Jewish controlled, what did 'planned economy' mean in practice?
    Answer: Here's a quotation (from 'Encarta', a Microsoft encyclopaedia resembling the later Wikipedia): In the Soviet Union, the government-owned and operated Gosbank, with its many branches, was the only banker for state enterprises, farm collectives, social organizations, and the government itself. Its allegiance was to the state rather than to its depositors. All businesses maintained deposits with the Gosbank, and all interbusiness transactions were recorded as financial transfers on its books. Since Gosbank bureaucrats continually observed business dealings, they were able to call attention to any deviations from the aims of the state's economic plan. As the government's fiscal agent, the Gosbank collected and paid all government income and expenditures.
    Typical puzzle: There has always been technology; there must have been discussions over 'planning' for millennia!
    Answer: Yes, there must. For example, the 'enclosures' movement in England involved elaborate planning. So did the settlement of the USA, and, before that, the whole process of investigating the New World, starting with the more accessible Caribbean islands. But the Jewish part in this was veiled in secrecy, as is shown by the relatively recent rediscovery of Jews and African slavery.
    Typical puzzle: Here's a quotation: With the election of a non-Communist government in 1990, Hungary accelerated its transition from a centrally planned economy to one based on free market principles. What does this mean?
    Answer: The truth is probably that Jews controlling the USSR prison camp decided it was time to leave—there was more money in dropping the 'central planning' (euphemism for Jewish plundering) in favour of getting public assets into Jewish control. Note that 'centrally planned' was used as a euphemism for Jewish control: obviously a plan can include any amount of non-strategic freedom, but the phrase, because of Jewish media control, was never used to include that possibility.
    Typical puzzle: Surely in 'planned economies' there were no super-rich—they made a point of claiming equality!
    Answer: Well, it's difficult to compare very different types of societies. Jews in the USSR had their own shops and supplies, their own buildings and apartments, access to overseas travel, dachas, cars, medical services, holidays, all subsidised or free. And of course power to silence critics. Most Russians didn't. It's hard to value all this. The simple fact Jews were able to convert their power into money—currency, ownership of factories and assets etc—when they decided to collapse the USSR shows the 'equality' was a fantasy. It's also important to have a realistic idea of what for example a 'billionaire' is: it may only amount to ownership of a large building or two, or a few streets of houses.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Nationalisation and Privatisation  After 1945, there was a movement to 'nationalise' British organisations, so that (in theory—meaning in Jewish propaganda terms) the people or nation of Britain would take control over profitable groups. In practice, this meant Jewish interests gained control over British assets. Unwanted organisations which were failing or marked for failure, or unprofitable or otherwise not wanted, could more genuinely be put under government control. Privatisation although presented by the Jewish media as the opposite of nationalisation, making publically-owned corporations privately-owned and shareholder-held, in practice is the same thing, in which assets of Britain are legally converted into Jewish-owned companies.
    Typical puzzle: I've heard that inter-war USA 'spent out of a depression'. But how on earth is this possible? How could they spend what they didn't have?
    Answer: When junk money (i.e. cheap stuff legally stated to be 'money') is printed by Jews, that 'money' is borrowed by the government, who have to pay back interest at face value. 'Spending' means Jews make a huge amount out of the transactions. In real terms, this comes from that country's future. Repaying costs of wars, and other policies Jews like, may take decades, centuries, and the loss of all assets to Jewish ownership.
    Typical puzzle: In the 1970s there were widespread worries about nuclear war, pollution, immigration, overpopulation and so on. Why was Thatcher only interested in selling off things like the gas industry?
    Answer: Thatcher was not an independent person; she was groomed by Jews, as is the usual pattern. Jews knew there was no risk of nuclear war. Jews were only interested in wealth, and so by increasing government debt and by intense advertising they were able to take over assets, exchanging their worthless paper money. Immigration and general damage to whites are policies which Jews decided upon and acted upon since about 1920.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Religion and Freethought. For centuries there have been critics of Christianity.  Voltaire attacked Roman Catholicism; many scientists and rationalists attacked religion generally.  But when it comes to Judaism, things are different—Jews have done everything possible to deter true criticism of Judaism.
    Typical puzzle: "The old Communist states were ideologically opposed to religion and offered an alternative deity in the form of an all-powerful dictator for the proletariat to idolise." etc.
    Answer: They were opposed to Christianity, which they destroyed as best they could. But they supported Judaism.
    Typical puzzle: "Destroyed Christianity? What do you mean?"
    Answer: Yes. Russia's Russian Orthodox Church was attacked financially and ideologically; so was peasant support. Russia had millions of artistic eikons; most of them were destroyed. Priests were killed. Lamaism (in south-eastern Russia) and Islam (south west) were attacked. You have to understand that all whites ("Christians") are hated by so-called Jews as enemies.
    Typical puzzle: How come Christianity's main figure is Judaic?
    Answer: Jews, in the Roman Empire, subverted early Christianity by repetitive lies, propaganda, and violence. Today's deception, the 'Holocaustianity' fraud, by all Jews acting together, shows they use that model. Having felt Roman power, Jews bent Christianity to neutralise Europeans; later, a similar process was applied to Arabs, who were fed violence and aggression to be used by Jews. See this short overview Jews, Christians, Islam
    Typical puzzle: ..... Pat Condell is another freethought man ... the likes of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens always scare believers who are always scared to death when confronted by intellectuals who know a lot more about their fanciful dogma than they do. James Randi and Shermer are scientific rationalists..
    Answer: Pat Condell, Dawkins and the late Hitchens are not freethinkers. They are an anti-Muslim, two anti-Christians. Plus two Jewish liars. None of them ever subjected 'Jews' to free thought. They are all special pleaders hiding as freethinkers.
    Typical puzzle: The 'Talmud' and Zohar etc are full of disgusting material.  Why doesn't the Church of England expose it?
Answer: Good question.  The answer must be that they have been deterred from doing so; how it's done is something which Bishops and vicars keep secret. Unless they were too lazy.
    Typical puzzle: Why is the Church of England so odd and un-English?
    Answer: Christianity's last argument for the existence of God fell with Darwin (or more accurately Wallace). It is now essentially a social organisation living on past assets. Unfortunately, it did not take its historical or cultural roles seriously; its record-keeping, information about the past—including scriptures, defence of traditions, acknowledgements of local stories, examination of the present, and help for the 'third world' have been weak or harmful. Just one example: they have had nothing to say about immigration despite the immense dangers.
    Typical puzzle: On the subject of Jews, what's the connection with the Church?
    Answer: Now that the newly 'enthroned' (2013) Archbishop of Canterbury, Welby, has Jewish ancestry and a false name, we must accept that the C of E will decline even faster than before. In January 2016, Welby, presumably as part of the Jewish push to replace whites, said in an address that "Jesus was a refugee"—when in fact the traditional story is that a census had been ordered, and people were to return to their home countries! The previous Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, contributed nothing to knowledge of world events, including African communities of Christians, and Israel. Another man of Jewish origin, Canon 'Giles Fraser', takes explicitly anti-Christian and pro-Jewish and Islamic views. Another once well-known fellow-traveller was Hewlett Johnson, whose book on Soviet Russia was published, in 1939, by Victor Gollancz, a Jewish publisher. The Church of England must have had a policy to avoid discussion of Jews; it's not credible they could have had no reason to be interested.
    Typical puzzle: What is the core message of Christianity?
    Answer: There is no 'core message'. It's like asking "What is the core message of the BBC? What is the core message of the New York Times?" Messages depend on current Jewish policy—tell lies about criminals; bomb some group; cover up some fraud—or whatever. As with Islam; the 'sacred' scribblings can be selected for very different situations.
    Typical puzzle: Anything more on the Church of England?
    Answer: The Church of England ought to be understood as an organisation analogous to the BBC, though of course with less technology of its own, and less knowledge of science, but with roughly equal status and wealth and intellectual dishonesty. The Archbishop of Canterbury is now selected from a shortlist by the Prime Minister; presumably there were analogous processes previously, in effect replacing the Roman Catholic policy of selection only between candidates. It has a curiously unreligious attitude to (for example) wars; I remember watching a guide in Manchester's Cathedral celebrating the Boer War; and looking at monuments to regiments; and seeing an exhibition in Blackburn where the Bishop helped with the Anne Frank fraud. St Paul's has hosted only three state funerals: Nelson, Wellington, and Churchill. It occurs to me that the homosexual element may have been part of the cosying-up to Jews process. Here's an introduction to London, the 'Great Fire', St Pauls, and the Bank of England. Very likely there must have been a policy to destroy earlier records, as is a Jewish policy. And here's a brief note on the Crown Corporation. Much of the modern aspect of the C of E was formed during the 18th century after Napoleon. The C of E's emergence at the Reformation might be repeated after a schism with Jews in future. Or possibly it is simply too obsolete to recover.
    Typical puzzle: 'Skeptical' groups, such as James Randi's [real name Randall Zwingli]'Educational Foundation', and the British Freethinkers, and Richard Dawkins, never say anything about the revolting beliefs and claims of Judaism (and very little on Islam's).  Isn't this in conflict with their supposed sceptical criticism?
Answer: Yes, of course it is.  Most of these groups are run, or controlled, or funded, by Jews.  For example, 'James Randi' is a Jew.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Stormfront Jewish feminists
[Image from here]
Names given (from Wikipedia) are: Bella Abzug | Kathy Acker | Rachel Adler | Larisa Alexandrovna | Gloria Allred | Shulamit Aloni | Rebecca Alpert | Pauline Bebe | Mayim Bialik | Malke Bina | Hanne Blank | Lisa Bloom | Judy Blume | Daniel Boyarin | Susan Brownmiller | Judith Butler | Aviva Cantor | Naomi Chazan | Judy Chicago | Ruth Dreifuss | Hedwig Dohm | Andrea Dworkin | Eve Ensler | Amy Eilberg | Jane Evans | Sandy Eisenberg Sasso | Susan Estrich | Susan Faludi | Merle Feld | Shulamith Firestone | Betty Friedan | Sarah Michelle Gellar | Ruth Bader Ginsburg | Ilana Gliechbloom | Emma Goldman | Elyse Goldstein | Lynn Gottlieb | Blu Greenberg | Tina Grimberg | Charlotte Haldane | Nina Hartley | Tova Hartman | Judith Hauptman | Dorothy Ray Healey | Susannah Heschel | Anat Hoffman | Brenda Howard | Sara Hurwitz | Paula Hyman | Elfriede Jelinek | Erica Jong | Elana Kagan | Roberta Kalechofsky | Michael Kimmel | Lydia Rabinowitsch-Kempner | Naomi Klein | Gilah Kletenik | Edith Konecky | Barbara Kruger | Anna Kuliscioff | Michele Landsberg | Paulina Lebl-Albala | Lori Hope Lefkovitz | Gerda Lerner | Amy-Jill Levine | Ariel Levy | Fanny Lewald | Rosa Luxemburg | Frederica Sagor Maas | Shelby McCabe | Hana Meisel | Annie Nathan Meyer | Haviva Ner-David | Martha Nussbaum | Margit Oelsner-Baumatz | Tillie Olsen | Judith Plaskow | Letty Cottin Pogrebin | Rachel Pollack | Katha Pollitt | Virginia Postrel | Sally Priesand | Trude Weiss-Rosmarin | Tamar Ross | Muriel Rukeyser | Danya Ruttenberg | Sheryl Sandberg | Zalman Schachter-Shalomi | Rosika Schwimmer | Drorah Setel | Alice Shalvi | Mendel Shapiro | Sandy Eisenberg Sasso | Susan Sontag | Daniel Sperber | Annie Sprinkle | Gertrude Stein | Gloria Steinem | Sandra Steingraber | Elana Maryles Sztokman | Yona Wallach | Wendy Wasserstein | Trude Weiss-Rosmarin | Naomi Weisstein | Ruth Westheimer | Naomi Wolf | Elizabeth Wurtzel | Diana Yoel | Lauren Shay Kaufmann
Feminism, Women's Liberation, Children, the Family. Many 19th/20th century writers—H G Wells, Frank Harris, Oscar Wilde, Emmeline Pankhurst, Bertrand Russell—favoured equality for women under protection of law. The Married Women's Property Act was a Victorian manifestation of that trend. It was not, as far as I know, a Jewish movement. After 1945, female Jews actively began to promote homosexuality, perversions, divorce and huge divorce payments, no children, and prostitution, even when (as in Islam) these societies were aggressively anti-woman, presumably because they wanted to weaken white societies. In the USA, many people are told the whole of feminism was Jewish, in the way they may be told 'socialism' was Jewish.
    Typical puzzle: Hasn't there been an odd change of meaning in 'feminism'?
    Answer: Yes. 'Free love' was a late 19th-century idea, dependent on many changes: population density in cities, changes which reduced infant mortality, increased mobility, greater anonymity, legal recognition of women. And also contraception, which was not at first very efficient. It's difficult now to understand the feelings attached to bastardy, being a 'fallen woman', and so on. In H G Wells's novel Ann Veronica (1909) 'the youthful heroine was allowed a frankness of desire and sexual enterprise, hitherto unknown in English popular fiction. That book created a scandal at the time..' A parallel line of thought was that women had not been allowed into (for example) medicine or law, and that their good example and hard work would improve the world in many ways. This feminism was not I think a Jewish-promoted movement, unlike the more modern fakes run by Jews, in which perversions, divorce, mass abortions, encouragement of rape and the ruin of families of whites, blacks, and enemies were forced as much as possible.
    Typical puzzle: All societies have considered the same things to be crimes—murder, theft, rape, for example.
    Answer: This simply isn't true. Rape for example has often been encouraged, notably by Jewish-run and Islamic regimes.
    Typical puzzle: I can't understand why anyone would disapprove of free women and women's liberation, or why people specifically claim it was Jewish.
    Answer: The Jewish version of women's liberation is designed to weaken the family unit, in the hope that their white rivals will be weakened. It's also why they want increased drug-taking, increased pornography, increased anal sex, and so on. The proof is that white girls murdered or abused by immigrants are not even mentioned. This attitude also helps with anti-human projects; for example women working in munitions factories prolonged the First World War. This works with blacks too: Lyndon Johnson (believed to be a Jew) arranged black mothers to be funded, but only if black fathers didn't live with them. Mexicans in the USA have a huge illegitimacy rate, and again, Jews promote this because whites pay the bills.
    Typical puzzle: Why is sex education for children so weird?
    Answer: There was a move, reacting to Victorian strictness, to educate children so they would not be shocked or horrified or too naive. The ideal time was when young, so they could be informed without emotional reaction. However the Jewish attitude is that child sex, with goyim, is to be promoted.
    Typical puzzle: Why is pornography dominated by Jews?
    Answer: Several reasons. Their so-called holy books recommend sex with girls aged three or more; non-Jewish girls are regarded as whores; there's money in it; and, as with erasing military honour, it helps weaken white countries. It's also anti-Christian.
    Typical puzzle: Feminism has helped women, but where are all the good men?
    Answer: Several reasons. Most people still don't understand the Jewish issue - Jews control money, and through it, the legal system. To understand the modern world, you have to divide it into two chunks—Jews and non-Jews. Since 1913 (the invention of the Jewish Federal Reserve), anyone with money has to be a Jew, or collaborate with Jews.
      Any white woman trying to find a husband will not find a rich white, because they've been crushed out by Jews. No white man will be able to earn honestly and support a white wife, because Jews tax and rip them off and support fake Jew 'social science' lies. Germany in the 1920s had desperate often unemployable white men, and desperate white women reduced to whores. In both cases any decency is crushed out by Jew-imposed theft. Of course, both white men and women often have no idea about all this.
    Typical puzzle: Why do men's movements have so much extreme material?
    Answer: Many people realise American-style 'feminism' is Jewish and designed to wreck families, notably of whites. But the same thing is true of parts of the 'men's movement'. White males are encouraged not to marry, to give up children, to have vasectomies, to treat women as mad; raw facts about Jewish paper money (which makes honest work for whites difficult, and encouraging women to concentrate on males for assets) and about laws are ignored. Violence is emphasized, even if not formally advised: their writings are full of serial murderers, rape, prison homosexual rapes, family violence, encouragement for black violence.
    Typical puzzle: Men despoil nature and ruin the natural world. Doesn't this make women superior to destructive males? Surely women cannot do worse?
    Answer: You don't understand Jewish influence. Jews hate whites—both white males and females. If Jews promote war—consider say WW2—they are delighted that goyim bomb each other, and that German women were raped, and fire bombing destroyed towns, and so on. They love regions of the earth being wrecked with spoil heaps to make weapons, which they profit from. Jews hate nature and love destruction of others—check it out. This is one of the main features of the last few centuries. It's not something that all males do.
    Typical puzzle: Marriage is Prostitution! No real woman should endure it!
    Answer: This is a typical bit of Jewish sloganising. 'Prostitution' isn't clearly defined, but any consideration of 'prostitution', for example Slav girls raped by Jews and forced into brothels in Tel Aviv, would presumably be regarded as worse than marriage by most women. Ditto with (say) girls used by American troops during long wars. It's of some wry amusement value to note the writers of this material don't object to prostitution of writers for money.
    Typical puzzle: I've just heard the idea that Jews may have used 'feminism' as an anti-white strategy. Any views?
    Answer: This is new to me, too! The idea was seeded in me by Simon Webb on suffragettes. Look at Women's Studies further on for details. And see this article specifically about the suffragettes who were probably funded at the top level by Jews.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Edward Harris June 15, 2016 - 4:15 am The OccidentalObserver
Some time ago a Rabbi raped a 3 year old girl in Mrs. Thatcher's constituency of Finchley in North London. The girl's parents reported the crime to the police. 200 Jews arrived at the house. They attacked the family, rioted, burned the house, burned cars broke windows and the family had to leave that day under the protection of the Riot Police never to return.
    The Jews did not want outsiders involved. This was reported in the local paper once only. No TV, no radio, no national newspapers.
Sexual Perversions.
Few people know (they have been shielded from the information) of the perversions in Judaism, including sex with tiny children, anal and animal sex, and sex-related murder and torture. Now, attitudes to homosexuality have varied, and I won't rehearse the arguments here (ancient Greeks, Church, love not involving sodomy, of the Oscar Wilde type). The relatively recent Jewish versions are intended to blur these distinctions, just like the other Jewish movements I'd tried to disentangle here. No doubt homosexual union with traditional married characteristic exist. But there are perversion-driven types, which Jewish-controlled media of course don't mention, leading to child murder and cruelty, paedophilia in the negative sense, child prostitution, bestiality, necrophilia. The motive usually appears to be destruction and damage to host groups, notably at present whites.
    Typical puzzle: Why be against 'gays'? Many of my friends are gay!
    Answer: You may not have understood what's going on here. The facts are active homosexuals have a far reduced life expectation, owing to anal and anally-transmitted diseases. The 'receptive' partners are more at risk. But that's their concern. Some homosexuals, not known to you, are evil and prey on innocents. The Jewish media promotion of 'gays' keeps this fact concealed. Another motive of Jews is to reduce white fertility.
    Typical puzzle: What links are there between Jews and perversions?
    Answer: There are many; I'll leave it up to you to check things out. For example, you might try looking at reports on pornography to identify the reliability of their discussions. You might check the links between girls used as prostitutes by jews in Israel.
    Typical puzzle: Why is Europe even more degenerate now than it was pre-WW2—despite there being so many fewer Jews in Europe?
    Answer: You've probably been confused by Jewish lies about the so-called 'Holocaust', an attempt to pass off the levels of cruelty of Jews and their puppets onto Germans.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

As Kevin MacDonald points out, the USA and Britain (and other white countries) abolished slavery. No other country, race, or group ever banned slavery. No Arabs, for example, ever considered even apologising for slavery. Of course there are complications. Jews have vast screeds of their own legal discussions on treatment of slaves.
    Typical puzzle: If slavery is so clearly evil, why was abolition in historical terms so late?
    Answer: This was related to industrialism. For the first time, a lot of manual work could be replaced by machines: wind-power, steam, water-power, electricity, and the internal combustion engine, in that sequence. There may well have been mechanical and business reasons for removing slavery. If the conditions recur, probably the same ideologues who now claim to be shocked by slavery would support it and say how necessary it would be.
    Typical puzzle: What exactly is 'slavery'? Is working-class labour 'slavery'?
    Answer: It's a serious problem, when discussing 'slavery', that the traditional, legal, and other aspects are unexamined. This of course is part of the Jewish control of information: it's only recently that Jewish involvement in African slavery was rediscovered, from centuries of Jewish lies and concealment; or that white impoverishment by Jews has been examined; or that what may be euphemisms for slavery ('indentured labour'), or may be legitimate legal devices, have been re-examined; or that whole patterns of labour have changed. There are issues of the treatment of women as 'slaves'. For the present, bear in mind that the word 'slavery' is used by Jews in the way 'racism' and 'fascism' are.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Misunderstanding the 1960s.
Even now, few people in the 'west' know how the Vietnam War was conducted by America. When I say 'America', shrewd readers will understand that the USA is not one country: there are the whites and others (and, now, invaders), but there are also Jews. The groups are separate and should be treated as having largely opposite economic interests. It is as misleading to talk about 'the Americans' as to talk about Romanians without mentioning Gipsies, and this is equally a Jewish propaganda policy.
    The 1960s had (as a result of biochemical discoveries) contraceptive pills and no doubt these produced predictable effects. But the view of the 1960s as a breakdown in traditional mores and a pathway to revolutionary anarchist disaster and madness is yet another deliberate Jewish lie. Briefly, for the first time since about 1940, fairly large numbers of people in the west had finally grasped that 'Allied' militarism was a matter of large-scale atrocity. Arguably, this was the first crack in large-scale Jewish lies which is now [2015] expanding down to the masses.
    The Vietnam War involved large-scale population movement, bombing, presumably to make money for Jews, on a scale greater than the entire Second World War, chemical warfare (look up 'defoliants', a topic carefully omitted by chemical engineers) and other intentional serious ecological damage, probably appealing to Jews as an analogue to spreading their faeces, and mass rape and prostitution, for aims of the sort supported by Lyndon Johnson, the Jew or Jewish fellow-traveller. Apart from money from arms and such things as bases and equipment, the modern form of imperialism by controlling money and trade, and making money from interest on loans of paper to the host regimes, were obviously aimed at. The war was started with a false flag, and it's likely Americans were specifically targeted by Jews, for example by snipers or assassins or weapons testers, in the typical Jewish manner. The main opposition to genocide seems to have been in America, and Jewish media control did its best to fight back, including taking over by controlled opposition, for example in France. Most of the fake protest 'movement' was Jewish.
    Part of the revisionist movement must include cognisance of war crimes by Americans and their allies. And work out how much of it was specifically Jewish. At present this is a huge blind spot, just as the Opium Wars are ignored and Churchill is still widely thought of as 'British' and 'patriotic' by naive Britons.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Pacifism and ending war.  Under the influence of Jewish propaganda, the causes of wars, and the beneficiaries of wars, are censored completely.  After WW1, Punch (a long-established British comic journal) had cartoons about war profiteers, who had 'done very well out of the war'.  Jewish censorship never permits discussion of money made by Jews out of  wars.
    Typical puzzle: Do you have some summary of 'pacifism' and what happened to it as a movement?
    Answer: Yes. Here's an article on Jewish Book Propaganda 1908-1948 which starts with a look at pacifism as a movement around the end of the nineteenth century. The First World War seems to have been a learning experience for Jews: before it, they hesitated, but after, in association with the unlimited funds from the 'Federal Reserve', all Jews became pro-war.
    Typical puzzle: I read in a novel that soldiers once had an idea of military honour.  What was this?
    Answer: Yes, there was a feeling that military power should be used for the general benefit of their society, and preferably also for the benefit of other societies.  And that cruelty should be minimised.  But Jews in the USSR had no compunction about murdering millions, including women and children.  With bombs and drones, Jews now make money out of mass killings, with no compunction. The US military establishment has taken over this attitude. The idea of military honour appears to be dead there.
    Typical puzzle: After the Second World War, the USSR occupied large amounts of eastern Europe, including half of Germany. There was, we were told, hostility against us by the USSR. What sort of victory was that?
    Answer: It was a victory for Jews and their money power. Jews controlled the USSR, and also the USA, and had new sources of fraud: world-wide control of money, what is now known to be a vast fraud of nuclear weapons, the pretence of which could be used to prevent any democratisation of Russia.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

“Two Sides to Every Question”.
    Typical puzzle: Are there "two sides to every question"?
    Answer: This is a mistake caused by failure to analyse. In fact, in many cases, there are two opponents. Let's call them A and B. But when Jews have penetrated deeply, there are three sides—A, B, and Jews. And that's the simplest level—there are usually some collaborators.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Intellectuals.  Jewish money and the buying-up of media, media distribution, and puppet writers has slowly led to the word 'intellectual' being applied predominantly to advocates of what Jews think are their interests.
    Typical puzzle: A Spanish General shouted "muera la intelectualidad traidora!"—death to the treacherous intellectuals!" Why?
    Answer: The Spanish Civil War was run on one side by Jews. The General despised them.
    Typical puzzle: The mathematician G. H. Hardy in conversation with C. P. Snow asked if he'd noticed a new meaning of 'intellectual' which didn't include them. What's the explanation?
    Answer: Jews were interested only in power through money, and causing damage. As far as they are concerned, nothing else counts than non-Jews following their trails. 'Marxism', the 'Frankfurt School', and encouragement of crime against whites illustrate the type of things which Jews count as 'intellectual'.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Jewish™ Word Abuse.  Given Jewish domination of the media, apart from Internet, Jewish perversions of the meanings of words are easily propagated, as part of the general process of insertion of Jewish lies into the world. In a similar way that advertising slogans and jingles are part of a campaign. The ™ aspect applies clearly in some cases, such as the Holocaust™ fraud, specifically applied to Jews. Usually it's far more subtle. And usually it continues for years, until the aims have been achieved.
    Typical puzzle: I hear a lot of discussion of 'genocides' and yet nothing is said about Jewish mass-murder in Armenia, the USSR, Ukraine, to take three.
    Answer: (Quoted from The Occidental Observer) Let us avoid falling into a trap of bombastic un-English words like "genocide", a verbal construct invented by Raphael Lemkin in 1945, a Jewish lawyer, who used it for one, i.e. his specific purpose, only. Mass murders notably by the post-1941 USA are ignored by the Jewish media.
    Typical puzzle: The media always talk about immigrants as 'deprived'; why?
    Answer: It's intentionally misleading. In fact most are infinitely better off than under their homegrown and often corrupt regimes, which themselves generally are under Jewish money dictatorships.
    Typical puzzle: I am a Jew - where is my money? I haven't got anything! Nobody gives me nothing! I'm like all the rest!
    Answer: Jews who say they've got nothing are of course lying: they have succeeded in invading countries far superior to their natural slum villages and disgusting towns. They also get favourable treatment from Jewish elites, so that Jewish hack entertainers, criminals, child sex perverts, fraudsters and so on may for example be kept in Israel.
    Typical puzzle: I said, that's odd, this BBC newsreader says whites are privileged. When I said that's odd, the person I was talking to said I'm anti-semitic! I can't see any link at all. What's going on?
    Answer: It's Jewish policy, which most people don't yet understand, to damage whites in whatever ways they think they can get away with. In my view, this is a genetic tendency produced through centuries of inbreeding, though science as yet is not sound enough to be able to decide. The phrase 'white privilege' even for people (for example) threatened or made homeless by immigrants hides Jewish policy. Just like saying anything investigating Jews, for example their policy of forcing coloured immigrants into white countries to weaken them and for miscegenation, is 'anti-semitic', though this parrot expression is wearing off in usefulness as the 'Holocaust' fraud in particular becomes better known.
    Typical puzzle: Were "war crimes" just a slogan propagated by Jews?
    Answer: The idea of civilised war makes some sense: presumably it makes sense for both sides, assuming it is a war, not simply a walkover. But it's worth noting the propaganda sense: Jewish wars, for assets and money and territory, have not usually been fought by Jews. Militarists, backed by Jews, have a vested interest in advertising civilised war. And also, most Jewish-backed wars are not wars in the no-holds-barred, fight-to-the-death sense: Jews want their gains, and are indifferent as to who gets killed. This is why many people are puzzled by the joint ideas of total war but also 'war crimes'.
    Typical puzzle: I'm puzzled. Arabs (including Palestinians) are described as 'Semitic' or 'Semites', and yet 'anti-Semitic' is thrown about as an insult to 'Jews'.
    Answer: The problem is, according to the Khazar theory, most modern 'Jews' are NOT Jews at all, and have no connection with them, if indeed there are any descendants from supposed Jews, Judaics, Judaeorum, or whatever they may have been. The people bandying around the phrase 'anti-Semitic' make the same mistake as someone discussing 'cowboys and Indians', thinking the 'Indians' were people from India.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]
'Concentration Camps'.
    Typical puzzle: What Exactly is a 'Concentration Camp'?
    Answer: Because of Jewish propaganda, this is another fear-and-hate phrase used tin the hope of preventing citizens thinking for themselves. Camps can have many functions: US soldiers in the Second World War lived in tents. Boers were put into guarded camps because they were spread across wide areas of land: they were 'concentrated' together in prison. Camps in the USSR were used by Jews to imprison and enslave and kill. In Germany, Jews were spread around in German territory and had to be imprisoned in isolation, along with other prisoners. There were compounds, holding prisons, work camps, transit camps, barracks, quarantine camps, etc. ... Thinking straight on this subject needs consideration of what the buildings or accommodation were for.
    Here's another Jewish Word Trick: Minorities—

'Minorities'.  The misuse of this word is another interesting example of Jewish ambivalence, in co-opting a phrase which can be used in a double sense.
    Typical puzzle: Surely 'minority' is clear enough?
    Answer: Not at all. Here's one use, from the David Irving trial, where he accused Lipstadt of libel: "This trial is not really about what happened in the Holocaust or how many Jews and other persecuted minorities were tortured and put to death" in which there's a double assumption, that Jews were 'persecuted', and also that minorities generally were tortured and put to death, without defining 'minorities'—did these include 'Kulaks' for example, or German women?
    Here's another example, from a post-1945 book on food: ... the Sovietization of Russia, and the Trustification of Palestine, are both attempts by the same international minority to enforce its will on native majorities. ... where Jews are clearly intended.
    Typical puzzle: Aren't minorities entitled to protection?
    Answer: You're assuming you've understood what 'minorities' are. Look at these 2014 population figures which I've grouped together ignoring small counties (and may not be very accurate anyway):-

China and Japan: 1,500+ M
India: 1,300+ M
Black Africa: 800+ M ?
Muslim: (Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia etc) 700+ M ?
White: 600 M?
Hispanic and Mestizo: 550+ M?
If you're reading this, you're in a 'minority'.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

World Government and 'The New World Order': was suggested as an ideal from the First World War, because the world was largely technically unified, at least for people with power, and because it promised to prevent war, in the way that Parliaments may have prevented civil wars. There were and are many variants, but the Jewish media assumes a Jewish stratum controlling the world. This is sometimes called the Jew World Order. But it's important to note an international government need not be arranged in this way. A suggestion by Bertrand Russell was that the sole function of world government should be to prevent war. Another comment of his was that a world government might have very difficult duties, for example not to increase food supplies to prolific populations. Another possible duty might be to enforce controls over Jews.
    Typical puzzle: Is world government possible?
    Answer: By 1914, the world was in unprecedented intercommunication. So, arguably, the reason there is not world government is because Jews opposed it, wanting their own violent and corrupt world.
    Typical puzzle: What about Jews and World Government?
    Answer: It's necessary to think of Jews separately from the rest of the world. They insist. Stalin gives some idea what a Jewish world regime would be like. BUT maybe a world government, with Jews kept out, could be the best possible arrangement. It's difficult to be certain, because many wars in the last few centuries were designed by Jews, so that just excluding Jews, without a world government, may be just as good.
    Typical puzzle: How new is the idea of ‘The New World Order’?
    Answer: In fact it's not new; a charge against 'Jews' at the time of the Roman Empire was that they were 'cosmopolitan'. (Neither word is original; both words are only a few centuries old). 'Cosmopolitan' is a coining combining the idea of the cosmos, which is itself a word picture—related to cosmetic, one turn of the earth, universe—with human behaviour in towns and city-states.
      The suggestion is of Jews as a layer straddling the known world, collaborating with each other, and implicitly against all other human groupings. Possibly there was a group evolution driven by sea travel.
    Typical puzzle: Shouldn't everyone oppose the New World Order? Who wants the present wars and chaos?
    Answer: I agree the way the world has developed is extreme, anti-democratic, and anti-human. But it doesn't follow that an international government has to be bad.
    Similarly with Europe: the European Union was planned in secret to be undemocratic, and its constitution in fact is based on the USSR. MEPs have no power to make Euro-legislation; only the Council of Europe has this assumed power. But this doesn't mean some sort of genuine European union is not desirable.
    Typical puzzle: What is the so-called 'International Community'? I'm always hearing about this on the ordinary media!
    Answer: This means the same as the Jewish-controlled media, that is, almost all media. Dissidents are censored. The U.N. for example has some claim to be part of 'the international community', yet its comments and votes on Palestine are routinely ignored. As another example, it's sometimes said that repatriations from white countries would lead to outrage from the 'international community': this simply means Jews think it's in their interest to destroy white countries.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Parliamentary Government and Official Opposition:  The ideal was Undiscriminating Laws applicable to all; genuine Parliamentary Democracy.  But in the background, organisations such as the Jewish ADL in the USA, and the Jewish Board of Deputies, actually draft laws, on subjects such as 'hate', to exclude Jews, synagogues, Jewish history etc.  The usual procedure seems to be to claim Jews are a religion, when race is the issue; claim to be a race' when religious discrimination is the issue; claim to be oppressed, when their behaviour is the issue.  It appears to be easy enough to control MPs, who are almost always fully dependent on their party to be selected.
    Typical puzzle: "Parliaments have official opposition, proven to be a very successful way to permit rational criticism and debate of the party (or parties) currently with a majority. It is unquestionably successful!"
    Answer: Unfortunately, freedom of belief and of debate does not necessarily apply. In Sweden, for example, all the official parties have the same policy on immigration. Since about 1900 in Britain, both old parties ('Conservative' and 'Liberal') and the new 'Labour' Party have had Jewish funding. In the USA, since the Fed was founded in 1913, party expenses have been paid by Jews with their freely-printed low-cost paper money, in easily big enough amounts to fix the results. This is quite apart from media control by Jews. It is a form of controlled opposition. At the time of writing, the BBC (headed by a Jew, Cohen) and for example Question Time (run by Dimbleby, a Jew) and the news (supplied by anonymous teams of writers, always following the Jew line) pretends that Cameron, a Jew, and Miliband, a mulatto Jew (his father is publically unknown) are presenting different policies. In fact, Jews now parasitise all British parties. Voting fraud is common, as is corruption in the police, medical services, finance, education, and science.
    Typical puzzle: Is revolution the answer? There seem to be two classes, and getting rid of the ruling class has always worked.
    Answer: The Jewish and Marxist idea is as you say. However, there are problems. The so-called 'Revolution' in 1917 in Russia was in fact a coup d'état, funded by Jews outside Russia. It was not a 'Revolution'. It's true all educated whites were at risk, and millions were murdered, but the result was not socialism. The whole idea that 'revolution' is the only way out is untrue, and is probably used to disguise the facts of slow secret infiltration. Probably many more successful attacks on regimes have been carried out against elites, than by revolutionaries; and probably 'revolution' is a Jewish myth, designed to hide that fact.
    Typical puzzle: Capitalism is generally regarded as a horrible evil. Shouldn't we get rid of it?
    Answer: You're not taking into account the fact that paper money gives Jews an advantage. Under free competition there could be something like the 19th century idea of optimisation through competition. But at present Jewish ownership of central—money-issuing—banks dominates. As to the idea of maximising returns, this makes sense given certain constraints. Not many people recommend throwing away resources with no return—it makes sense to get some sort of return; agriculture and industry exist because things will be needed in future.
    Typical puzzle: Must we accept the demise of socialism, and the success of capitalism?
    Answer: This idea comes from the 'fall' of the Soviet Union in 1991. What you haven't noticed is that the USSR ever since its beginnings in 1917 was run by Jews, in association with Jews in the rest of the world. It was not socialism. They pretended it was socialism, because it suited them to have some idealistic theory. Not only that, but the world after 1991 was not run under 'capitalism'. It still had Jewish paper money on the top tier. It may seem to you to be 'capitalist', because you have to struggle for money, and were taxed etc; but in fact of course it wasn't, as ultimate financial power remained with Jews.
sandwich boardsandwich board
Sandwich boards
    Typical puzzle: Should I vote left-of-centre, right-of-centre, or what? I don't want to vote extreme left or extreme right—I'm not an extremist!
    Answer: The simple 'left' vs 'right' distinction doesn't work in real life. It's just a smokescreen to waste peoples' time. In practice, the main parties are funded by Jews and carry out Jewish policies, along with paid 'useful idiots', disguised as much as is felt to be needed. Jewish policies are to increase Jews' wealth and power, and damage rival races, especially whites. In Britain, the 'Labour' party so-called has been run for generations by people who are not and never have been workers. The voters are told Labour stands for e.g. trade union rights, more money for workers, more holidays etc but the fact is their policies have been to force massive immigration, increase taxes, kill innocent foreigners for Jewish reasons. The 'Conservative' party has if possible even less to do with genuine conservatism, favouring of course massive immigration, avoidance of taxing Jews and leaving bankers alone, and building fake windfarms as part of a fake energy policy.
    Typical puzzle: What are fascists?
    Answer: [1] Fascism was technically an Italian movement in the 1920s and 1930s. Its symbol was a bundle of sticks tied together. Italy was on the winning side in WW1, but felt left out after; this is one reason for the rise of 'Fascism'. Another is the lack of raw materials such as coal and metal ores. (Mussolini I believe said Italy's only natural resource is mineral water). The reason 'fascism' is used as a general-purpose swear word is partly to avoid mentioning the 'socialism' in 'National Socialism'.
    [2] Jews are terrified at the possibility that other groups might use Jews' own technique and unify against them. This is why the potential power of cohesive groups is always minimised: you will have heard of Caesar, Christ, Mohammed, Cromwell, Napoleon, Castro, Lenin, Mandela and so on, but not the large number of anonymous supporters uncritically working for them behind the scenes. If cohesiveness has to be mentioned, it is attacked. In my opinion this is the reasoning behind parrot cries of 'Fascist' and for that matter 'racist', which implies large groups of similar people.
    Typical puzzle: Anything more detailed on Fascism?
    Answer: Well, here's a Professor Bentwich (see Jensen on the 'world food shortage'):–
... Mussolini had appointed three Jews to the Commission which amended the Italian Constitution, and had chosen a Jewish Finance Minister and a Jewish President of the Court of Cassation. He [Del Vecchio] was, too, the only University Professor enrolled in the party before the March on Rome." ... The Fascist party had, as a matter of historical fact, been financed by the two Jewish monopolists, Counts Volpi and Pirelli, who between world wars are well-known figures in the City of London. Mussolini's Abyssinian adventure was, in part, financed by the Paris Rothschilds, and his Abyssinian expert was a Jew. (On being "liberated" from "Italian" Occupation by the "British" the Abyssinian Emperor, the Lion of Judah, was suitably provided with an Allied Staff of Advisers who were mostly of Professor Bentwich's race. Professor Bentwich himself advised—in between other engagements in the Middle East—the Emperor on the sort of Constitution he was to have. Professor Kamrat, a Jew, was put in charge of Education; the Jew, N. Marien, appointed Minister of Justice; the Jew, Dr. Schalit, Minister of Health, while the Jew, E. Ullendorff, manages official "Abyssinian" propaganda. The American Minister in Addis was the Jew, Felix Cole. In Eritrea, the Jew, M. Greenspan was made Public Prosecutor. ...
    Typical puzzle: What are facists?
    Answer: They are illiterates who can't spell 'fascism'.
    Typical puzzle: What are 'Nazis'?
    Answer: 'Nazi' wasn't a German word; it was made up as a sort of group insult, like 'goy' or 'wog' or 'Vietcong'. Probably it will fall out of use, like most such agitprop expressions. I was amused to read that Veronika K Clark uses 'Britzis' and 'Juzis' and I think 'Freemazis' in her books. See Jewish Propaganda in Britain before the Second World War
    Typical puzzle: Is there a difference between fascists and 'Nazis'?
    Answer: Fascism in Italy was imposed from the top down, a movement to try to make Italy more united; or make big organisations stronger. But the NSDAP was bottom up, a political party that relied largely on votes. Don't forget the Falangists in Spain, the regime in Japan, and the regimes in the USA and UK.
    [Note: 'National' is spelt 'National' in German, but 'Nazionale' in Italian]
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Race: Human races play a large part in the 'Jewish' world-view; all others being regarded as inferior to Jews, the so-called 'chosen people'. 'Inferior' isn't a strong enough word: all non-Jews are regarded as insignificant, biologically unimportant, non-human garbage.
  Important note on race: Humans have bred plants, animals, and birds for thousands of years. And human actions have affected human beings themselves. Many aspects of human races are therefore not purely natural: it is essential to understand the ways human races have been changed, by everything from war and infanticide and castration, to population movements and medicine and foods.
    Typical puzzle: 'White Flight' is racist and must be stopped!
    Answer: Jews have set up Israel for Jew flight. Especially for the large numbers of Jewish fraudsters, sex criminals, etc.
    Typical puzzle: What is 'racism'?
    Answer: This word (used in the pejorative sense) is attributed to 'Trotsky' (real name Bronstein). One of his policies was massive movements of populations of one race into another's territory, to inflame wars and keep control using thugs with weapons. In the world of controlled propaganda, anyone who thought this was unfair or disgusting was a 'racist'. This word is never applied to Jews to themselves, despite their extreme 'racist' ideology.
    Typical puzzle: Is it true the USSR was not racist?
    Answer: No. The USSR was a Jew supremacist state, funded by Jews and subordinated to Jews.
    Typical puzzle: Your statements are quite antisemitic, another thing that detracts from your argument. Since racism, prejudice and despising people for something external—like skin color, or what religion they were raised in—tends to be built on ignorance. And ignorant people are classic useless idiots.
    Answer: 'Race' needs analysis of psychological, medical and biological distinctions. You seem to be too ignorant of even basic science to know that.
    Typical puzzle: I've been told (hundred of times) that "race doesn't exist" and "race is a social construct". I can't believe this is true; why the lies?
    Answer: Of course races exist, as they do in pretty well all other life-forms on earth. It's a natural outcome of genetics. The reason for the lie comes from Jewish ideas: their whole mental life is based on race, and as long as they control the media they can repeat this lie, in the hope of distracting attention for their anti-human belief systems. As for the 'social construct', there is some truth in this, and probably the phrase is a Jewish projection: they invent rules as to who is a 'Jew', and moreover have a high proportion of Khazar descent, who can themselves only be considered Jews as a 'social construct'!
    Typical puzzle: Babies aren't racist!
    Answer: Babies have no language and no knowledge about the world.
    Typical puzzle: What are rascists?
    Answer: More illiterates, parroting slogans they don't understand.
    Typical puzzle: Why the screaming foaming-at-the-mouth attitude to eugenics? I hear comments like: 'I'm against eugenics the way it unfolded for whites'; 'eugenics was promoted by Swedish socialists to sterilize the Roma'; 'Eugenics were practised in the United States and in Israel'; 'the royals are a real world example of what happens when some try to breed for quality', 'looking for the supreme human being?', 'eugenics is controlled breeding'.
    Answer: Yes. It's just more Jewish nonsense. They don't want healthy, tough, intelligent rivals. They want goyim to be stupid and feeble, so they aren't rivals. Here (in a different file) is an article on this topic, based on a propagandist BBC TV programme. And here is Eugenics is not Euthanasia
    Typical puzzle: Why have the media, for as long as I remember, talked nonsense about races?
    Answer: It's a Jewish hang-up. In their fantasy world, they think they are a master race, or rather 'the' master race. They know with some embarrassment it's not true—or why would they need to deceive, lie and defraud? So race is a sore point with them. They're like a family of primitive superstitious murderers, shrieking that they would never, ever do anything like that! Don't be a part of their stupidity. ... Read the next section ...

Race and Jews:
Isaac Zangwill
Isaac Zangwill, real or supposed author of 'the Melting Pot'.
A theory that appears occasionally is that 'Jews' were or are a mulatto race. Absence of self-criticism in many blacks may be supporting evidence.
Melanie Phillips
'Melanie Phillips' ('Jew' from Poland; I wonder if the name is someone's joke). "I dindu nuffin" is exactly in 'Jewish' style.
Yentob, 'Creative Director' of the BBC. When you see faked history, anti-white and anti-intellectual lies and insults &c on the BBC, this primitive creationist lump of shit from Iraq is ultimately responsible
    Typical puzzle: Are Jews a Race or a Religion?
    Answer: 'Jews' are best viewed as a race, or sub-race, produced by the long-term effects of the written word. If reading and writing had never been invented, it's difficult to see how 'Jews' could have emerged as a sub-race, inbreeding according to a fanatical set of guidelines.
    Typical puzzle: Are Jews Whites?
    Answer: If it works to their advantage, they claim to be white. Otherwise, they chant 'I'm not white–I'm Jewish'. If more White people knew that Jews are not white, activities such as wars, porn and frauds would not have the same demoralizing effect. That's why whites are entitled to say who are Jews. Just a tiny number of examples, some from the Occidental Observer:
    • Tim Wise goes around claiming that he's White. His audience needs to know that he is not.
    • Alan Colmes. When he says to Jared Taylor that "we" stole the land from the noble Red man, he doesn't really mean we. He's not an unusually conscientious and moral White man making a collective self-criticism; for him as a Jew it's an accusation against non-Jews.
    • Jack Straw, Yvette Cooper, Ed Miliband, David Cameron, Daniel Cohen, Alan Yentob are a tiny proportion of the so-called Jews in British politics and commentariat. When they say Britain needs immigrants and has humanitarian obligations, they mean Jews think Britain invaded by immigrants is to their advantage. They feel zero moral obligation to Palestinians, victims of wars by Israel, defrauded Germans.
    Typical puzzle: You say Jews are responsible for everything! You say they run the world! You're mad! (Screeches)
    Answer: No. Jews have a huge amount of influence. Obviously they aren't infinitely powerful, or the world would be a big slave-camp. If they were infinitely powerful, they would have no need of propaganda. If they were brilliant at business, they wouldn't need to continually rely on secret influences and paper money fraud. The trick is to work out what part of the human power structure is Jewish; and what to do about it.
    Typical puzzle: Jews are a religious people, not a race! Jews always oppose racism!
    Answer: So-called Jews think of themselves as a race, more so than almost any group. Pretending to be religious is a form of concealment, relying on most 'gentiles' having a vaguely favourable view of religions. Would you say gypsies are a religion?
    Typical puzzle: I've read that Jews have been behind all world-changing events—Christianity, secular humanism, Marxism, Socialism, Communism, feminism, multiculturalism, the labor movement. And Jews win more Nobel Prizes than any group per head. George Galloway says they were the greatest people on earth! They are so creative!
    Answer: You are claiming creativity where it doesn't exist; because, with control of publishing, Jews praise each other to a ridiculous extent. Christianity (arguably) was drawn up from other religions, in an attempt to hold the Roman Empire together; the Communist Manifesto was plagiarised; humanism was a 'religion' for people who found religions absurd; socialism was a movement against unrestricted industrialism; feminism involved such things as chivalry and the suffragettes, and generally tried to help women; the genuine labour movement had roots back to the Middle Ages or before.
    Other world-changing events—the rise of science and technology, the rise of law between tribes and countries, such things as the invention of agriculture, the invention of towns, the discovery of metals—probably had absolutely minimal Jewish input.
    As for Nobel Prizes, many are awarded for wrong, dubious, or junk work. (See this site on biology, for example).
    As for art, aesthetics, and music; buildings and architecture and towns; food, drink, comfort; literary achievements—even Jews don't claim to have contributed much. Rather, their net effect has been very damagingly negative.
    Typical puzzle: Why do Jews talk about multiculturalism, when their only interest is themselves?
    Answer: You're right that their only interest is themselves. Europe in fact is already multicultural, with a kaleidoscope of landscapes, languages, beliefs, outlooks. The reason Jews use the misleading slogan 'multiculturalism' is that they mean to promote immigration into white countries, but don't want to call it 'multiracialism' in case whites don't like it. Jews so far have supported third-world immigration into white countries because they hope it will damage those countries. They do not support third-world immigration into Israel; in fact they are trying to throw out sub-Saharan blacks and others.
    Typical puzzle: What exactly is 'multiculturalism? Where did it come from?
    Answer: This is yet another example of a sensible movement being hijacked and perverted by Jews. In its origins, it was felt that children should be taught about other languages, other lands, other ways of life, to give them some grounding in facts about the world and their place in it; just as they ought to be taught a range of subjects, to give them choices and interests. By the usual methods of money power and fraud and force, and the use of collaborators, Jews hi-jacked this idea. They had no interest in wide and deep knowledge in children, and they replaced the original ideal with an excuse to flood in immigrants, something which Jews planned since the 1900s. The educational idea was converted into endless repetition of third-rate simple slogans, which inferior teachers could manage. In the original formulations there was no intention to migrate people, any more than there was in Marx, who despised non-Europeans and disliked Slavs. The 'multicultural' label was invented by Jews to disguise the change in meaning.
    Typical puzzle: How do Jews 'see' whites? What is specific to them?
    Answer: Judging by their actual behaviour, there's a combination, possibly genetic, or possibly due to exposure to 'Jewish' teachings when very young, of hate combined with caution and unscrupulousness. Most whites, when they see other people, assume the others will show reasonable behaviour and have reasonable knowledge—though of course there may be warning signs based on language, class, visual clues, worrying behaviour, and so on. The default Jewish view seems to be that whites are stupid, and know very little—not of course without some foundation.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

    Let me try to illustrate how Jews see whites and Christians. A normal white person looking at (say) a Scandinavian town notes the landscape of lakes and trees, the picturesque wooden houses, the ancient churches, the characteristic food based on fish, the language, the distinctive clothes, the defences against long winters, and all the rest. Jews one has to assume look, and think the women would be good whores, the kids could be used for sex, the businesses should pay heavy taxes, Jews should rule with their ridiculous bearded 'patriarchs', police should patrol, and shoot or bayonet any Scandinavian who comments on Jews, the best locals should be rounded up and killed, and the entire area should be ruined by importing savages. If they can find some point of friction, they want to start fighting between other groups, until the best of them are killed and as many others as possible. They are happy to cheat and lie; and not only is this their inner instinct, they are willing to work all their lives for such destruction.

    Here's an interesting discussion on Jews and racial evolution and parasitism, and the different impressions that different racial and sub-racial types make. Remember that 'Jews' are a sub-race produced by the written word. Without the effects of reading and writing, 'Jews' could probably never have existed. And, taking a long view of the evolution of human speech, bear in mind that, in the early stages, there was no written word, no recording devices (tape, film, video etc)—so that evidence of truth was hard to gather. Under these circumstances, a firm, unyielding liar would be difficult or impossible to disprove. An evolutionary link between hostility and lying may have been generated. The "dindu nuffin" phrase of blacks illustrates the same idea. So do some animals which resolutely feign death in the hope of escape.
    Please don't underestimate the importance of 'Jewish' influence; as an hypothesis, it has considerable explanatory power. For example, Richard Lynn wrote a chapter on China and Europe emerging as world powers together, so far as the future is predictable, with China taking the lead, but Lynn simply has no idea that a parasitic group might want to act dysgenically.
(The following is from the NukeLies offtopic section, taken from Owlbear of TheOccidentalObserver.net, itself taken from a closed-down site called 'Thiazi'. Judging by the vocabulary, this may date from the 1920s or 1930s)

Merkel expressionMerkel; Polish Jew extraction. East German 'communist' trying to flood Europe with aliens. Hobsbawm jew faceHobsbawm, Jewish 'professor of history', ignoring Jewish violence in 'Soviet' (i.e. Jewish) Russia
Kissinger jew faceHenry Kissinger: one of the controllers of US genocides and atrocities around the world
ugly?Susan Sontag: Jewish 'thinker', whose genetic fanaticism made her write whites are the cancer of the world
ugly?Harold Shipman. Jewish serial murderer in UK of hundreds of goyim. (Killings of course far below Jews in USSR and wartime)
Dimbleby jew expression David Dimbleby, who hid his Judaism all his life; groomed as a BBC lifetime liar Jew US TV Jew on US TV, script from current Jewish schemes—Zimmer­man as white, Trayvon Martin as victim; 'black lives matter' slogan; racist cops, inno­cent blacksStone jew faceDr Richard Stone, a Jewish GP, helping pro­long the farce of the Stephen Lawrence Enquiry, persecuting British police, ignoring atrocities against whites
ugly?Herbert Marcuse's simian daughter. Typical of utter subser­;vience and lack of criticism of gener­ations of 'Jews' to 'Jewish' fantasies and lies
'Sefton Delmer', Jew who lived in Hungary, scato­logical prop­agandist liar of WW2

        It started with the question whether Cro-Magnon-types or Aurignac-Types look more dangerous. For example, there is a certain physiological type, common in all races that looks brutish, impressive, bear-like, full of primitive physical strength. In the European races this is represented by the Cro-Magnon specimen. Their bodies and faces tell you: "Careful, I am strong!". But there is also a type that looks more elegant, cunning, wolf-like. This is represented by the Aurignac type. Their message is: "Be careful, I am fast!" Whenever a tribe would conquer another one the representatives of both this Alpha male groups would recognize, battle, exterminate or respect each other.

    In contrast, subdominant types like the Alpinoid that arose from the cleansed rests of conquered and enslaved early Cro-Magnon people (in Europe) or conquered and enslaved other groups in the rest of the world) look totally different. They have this "I am harmless, do not hurt me" - feminine, round, fatty, small appearance, together with a cyclothyme temper (emotional, social, multi-tasking etc.) in contrast to schizothyme or vicious temper of Alpha males (schizothyme ~ fanatical, intellectual, ingenious ~ Aurignac; vicious ~ pain-resistant, unbreakable ~ Cro-Magnon).
    Typically, whole races that have been driven to the edges of extinction or the fringe by stronger ethnicities tend to appear subdominant. Just take South American jungle indios in contrast to the highly developed Plains Indians (although they represent yet another Alpha type, the Dinaric one, which is in European peoples represented by certain types from the Balkans or in ancient Rome: a good example would be Julius Caesar. Dinaric ~ "mature,old" ~ comparable to the impression that for example birds and reptiles make).

    But in the area of the fertile crescent, the Middle East, the place where for the longest time in observable history humans lived together in city-civilizations, yet another, third group, could develop. The specimen of this group tend to look like beta-males (take Henry Kissinger, does he not look cute and harmless?) where they in fact are parasitic and aggressive. Of course they need to DECEIVE their counterparts, they do not want to let them see their true nature. Their every physical characteristic was selected for this purpose. Their eyes are without any clarity, pale and cloudy, so that you cannot guess their intentions. Their body language is deceitful, the voice intonation and language talent is programmed to hide, instead of reveal their true intentions.

    In this respect it is utterly wrong to say that Jews are semitic in the sense of an anthropologic group. In fact, what we identify as typical Jewish features is anthropologically known as the "reduced Armenian or Armenoid type". True semitic people on the other hand, if they are not degenerated tend to look strongly Dinaric (mature, deep and harsh facial structures, hawk-like noses); if reduced or degenerated Levantine, they look like Beta-males of the more unpleasant sort (but not "cute" = likable, friendly). This explains to some extend the authors instinctive reactions, instincts that were to his own surprise misguiding him; just like the cuckoo misguides his adoptive parents.

    One last thought: Why did our ancestors let the Jews come and live among them? Why did they not conquer, destroy or repel them? Why did they not integrate them? Because the Jews were neither really a subordinated or conquered race like for example the blacks in India, but they appeared just as harmless as any of these. And because the were not looking like Alpha males (at least after their ethnogenesis was completed in Babylon and they ceased to be Semites in the sense of "the scum of Egypt") but even more of a threat as any Alpha-appearing group.

    The same is true with gypsies, although to a lesser degree of perfection since they came from a younger city-civilization and their selection process is not finished.
[Notes by rerevisionist: [1] Good summary from a Middle Easterner: Brother, with all due respect, the foundation of Zionism is Judaism, and the Torah began their propaganda against Middle Eastern civilisations more than 2500 years ago.
    The Torah invited Jews to kill Canaanites, Assyrians, Babylonians, etc etc in order to claim their "promised" land. These ancient Hebrews spoke of our ancestors as if they were animals, and archaeology has proven that Babylon, Assyria and Hattusha [Hittites] were among the most advanced civilisations on Earth. Not to mention the way the Torah advocated theft and usury [and murder] in general.
    Judaism is rotten, and so is Zionism.

    [2] For US readers, note that 'Indian' groups or 'native Americans' are of course spread across an entire continent, and can be expected to show evolutionary differences. The deadening of intellectual curiosity under the US Jew regime will certainly have damaged speculation and research, but I'd suggest Americans (and Canadians and Mexicans and South Americans) might research these groups, and make discoveries.
    [3] There seems to be a conflict between parasitism and staying as a tight group: parasitism is illustrated by 'elite' groups spread in many countries; hanging together is illustrated by the preference for 'ghettoes'. Possibly a parasitic response needs to be triggered by opportunity.
    [4] The piece above stresses 'cities' as a part of Jewish evolution. Please realise that cities necessarily imply some isolation between the citizens: there is simply not time for everyone to greet, and chat with, and get to know, everyone else in the city. In Australia, neighbours may say "G'day" to each other. In New York, they don't. High trust is necessary for cities to function. There is, therefore, opportunity for hostile groups to infiltrate, since most people in cities don't know other people they casually see, and can be expected to be fairly polite. The long-term effects can be expected to be a rise in dishonesty.
    [5] Global geography. Consider the very long nights in northern Europe and Asia in winter. People don't hibernate; but the climate must have favoured people who tolerated long-term activities—hobbies and research and study and observation and sagas and food preservation tricks and shelter.
      And consider that Europe had many natural borders: mountains, seas, dense forests. Invasion was difficult, which must have favoured the presumption of low risk from strangers.
    [6] In modern times, we have forensic detection, photographs, written records, sound and vision recording. But in ancient times there was not much more than witness evidence. Jewish evolution seems to have favoured types who were convincing liars, who could simply, without strain, repeatedly lie. Elie Weisel is just one modern example.
    [7] Divide-and-rule seems well adapted to fanatically networked groups. All they need do is observe potential divisions. They have no need even to understand why, or even if, such divisions exist. They simply inflame them. In the last 200 years, Russia, Germany, and Britain were propagandised against each other by the printed word. For about 150 years, 'classes' have been more or less invented, and propagandised against each other. Since the time of Coudenhove-Kalergi, races have been set against each other, where Jews thought they could benefit.
    [8] Deep roots of language. We are of course so used to language it seems natural and rather obvious. I'd like to suggest that language has very deep roots, and its invention and spread and change must have left evolutionary outcomes in human races. Jewish language use may have a special inbuilt evolutionary purpose, perhaps to influence, persuade, and corrupt outgroup members; before there was much technical knowledge, this must have been important. Consider phrases translated as "The Son of Man", "In the beginning was The Word", "It is written"; the Jewish pretence that spoken incantations make food pure; and the frequent mental-illness suggestions of 'God' speaking to this or that Talmudic or Biblical personage. These sorts of schizophrenic-style speak resemble incantations and ritual curses, and disembodied phrases such as "Christianity took over the Roman Empire'.
    [9] Deep roots of value assessment. There must be genetic influences: a group evolved to deal with tames animals, and one which treats animals as raw materials, provide a simple example. Families, land, physical activities must form some part of human preferences, and in the long term, obviously, assessments which match the long-term real world are likely to prosper, while the conditions continue. Many blacks seem to have a similar outlook to Jews: they essentially want to take, without necessary even understanding the implications. The white man's burden is more complex than its simple scribbler understood; how many blacks are working to design a soundly ecological, sustainable future for Africa?
    [9] Facial expressions and crypsis: the genetics of faces is puzzling: why is there so little apparent genetic similarity between parents and children? Could there be some genetic mechanism for crypsis in faces? Maybe a 'straight face' is a genetic need for psychopaths and liars? Maybe confidence tricksters need this? Film stars often enough have facial oddities: Michael Caine said he had some eye problem which gives him a fixed stare, for example.
    [10] Sexual selection: maybe ugliness has a genetic advantage in keeping tribes together if the gene pool has advantages in some situations; could they be less of a target than (for example) blondes? Could this explain why (((American))), (((British))), (((German))) female politicians are indifferent to rapes of white girls?
    [11] Spreading: I've seen many suggestions that Jews interbreed, so they resemble other groups: Obama ['Jewish' mother] is an example; Jews in Europe another, such as Merkel ['Jew' from Poland]; Jews in China yet another. Obviously, interbreeding may weaken the original genetics. Could there be selection for wealth, power, psychopathy, or even weakness? Consider for example Paul McCartney's wives, British aristocrats, crime bosses, trade unionists.
    [12] The USA: bear in mind that only 240 years have elapsed since 1776. And yet Jews have wriggled into very many niches. This is a time of exceptional mobility; but given a few thousand years, the hypothesis above is entirely credible.

Problems with Whites
Kevin MacDonald's views as whites having evolved in an individualistic way puts emphasis on reputation as an important fact, and the possibility of 'pathological altruism'. In my view, these can be replaced by something like 'obeying orders'. In small groups, everyone wants much the same things: food, warmth, shelter, amusement and education, water, child-reading, security. There's a lot to be said for young people doing what they're told, and older people passing on their skills, and individualism when it comes to finding new ways to do things. Something of this can be felt in such things as village life, camping trips, carrying out projects. MacDonald does not seem to see that in much larger groups, 'obeying orders' can be counter-productive, as the jewish-media use of the phrase, and jewish-media censorship, suggests. Huge numbers of whites respond to such ideas as: "We're going to bomb and burn all these people!"—"Yessir." "You have to be nice to this other group whatever they do!"—"Yessir." "We need to tell lies about this, for their own good!"—"Yessir". "We must defraud the voters"—"Yessir". But, like parasitised ant colonies, there's a possibility that the subgroup issuing orders has other aims than helping local groups.
    Simply put, whites obey well; when they try new things, they are at their best when working for their community; when they try new things with other human or human-like groups, they can be ordered into harming their community.]

China and Human Evolution
China is another area rich is evolutionary suggestions. It has a long history of literacy, and of portable written material. The absence of an alphabet suggests a literary class which put preservation of itself above the possible advantages for ordinary people, which perhaps also suggests lack of fear of competition from outsiders. The contrast between Confucian writings and Talmudic material—I'm using generally-understood phrasing here—seems important. Early Chinese writings pre-date most writing anywhere else in the world, assuming dates are fairly accurate. The feedback effects of Chinese literacy and the production of 'Mandarins' may turn out to be more important than other evolutionary pathways. Bertrand Russell wrote that ‘... a civilised Chinese is the most civilised person in the world.’ Certainly the simulacrum of civilisation among Jews compares unfavourably. And the course of Middle East evolution may have significant lessons, assuming the region's artefacts can survive Jewish ruination.

Hopes for research
Given the increase in availability of factual material—surely by now enough has accumulated to say useful things—I like to hope that research into genetics and populations might lead to useful generalisations. For example, it may be true that belief in what populations are told is distributed among two loose groups, a small proportion of sceptics, and a large proportion of non-sceptics. Just as psychopathy may be, or for that matter colour 'blindness'. In each case, there are occasional group advantages in people who can creatively doubt, who take dangerous risks, and whose eyesight is unusual. Maybe the next big step in ideas will be some powerful generalisation(s) from biological statistics.

    An example of possible specialised genetics useful to parasitism: identifying important people: I once chatted to Lancelot Ware, a co-founder of British Mensa, who commented (in a discussion on human abilities and differences) that some people can enter a room and immediately know who the important persons are. This may or may not be true, but certainly such a skill would be valuable for parasitic sub-groups.
    Another example of possible specialised genetics useful to parasitism: telling lies with a straight face: I'm told a few breeds of sheep scatter when they stampede; most races of sheep stay in a flock. Another atypical characteristic is playing dead, 'playing possum'—most creatures try to escape if they sense danger, but some just lie inert, even if they are vulnerable, and no doubt this must have worked for some of their ancestors. Most human groups find it hard to tell lies; and doubt this had evolutionary advantages in many cases. Jews may be viewed as an exceptional sub-race, finding it perfectly natural to tell lies.
    This may be a genetic outcome of the technical difficulty of knowing the truth in the past. Where proof is difficult, there may be genetic advantages in being undetectably skilled liars. Internet, with technologies such as small video cameras and searchable databases, is shining light on such behaviour: as lies become simpler to detect and expose, people will increasingly learn, perhaps unforgettably, of the lies of Jews—such as Netanyahu.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

IDENTIFYING JEWS written mostly by 'ENDZOG' in 2015.

The Jewish Yearbook lists huge numbers of Jewish organisations. And it includes some named 'Jews', presumably carefully selected. Who's Who (founded 1849, significantly) and Who Was Who seldom if ever explicitly identify Jews, except in the few cases of religious relevance. Burke's Peerage, now long past its peak of importance, was edited to conceal Jews.

To identify a Jew it helps if you have spent your working life as a bookseller in what is now (apart from the fetchit Goyim at the till or dusting the shelves) an entirely Jewish-owned and run business. I won't say profession, because it no longer is as the Jews have turned what used to be a door to almost infinite knowledge under the white man into a trashy supermarket selling only Jew-published, in many cases Jew-written, Jew-commissioned and Jew-approved material (political, philosophical, sociological, cultural Marxist propaganda and porn; soft and hard). Working with Jews for years however is not an advantage in Jew-spotting most people have.


First, Google the person's name adding Jew or Jewish and see what comes up. Only a small number of Jews identify themselves as Jewish and these are the ones who are working the Holohoax, Synagogue and other allied industries. The vast majority of Jews are Marrano especially when the Chief Rabbi after the war asked them to change their names to British names (including Welsh, Scots and Irish names) and this is why Britain's Jewish population is not as some think a few hundred thousand but possibly around two million, certainly they occupy whole areas of London and other areas in very large numbers and are creating more aurevs around the country. The following places in London were listed by the ADL-related Jewish organisation Hope Not Hate as picking up points during the 2010 election for Jews opposing the BNP: Colindale/ Edgware/ Finchley Central/ Golders Green/ Harrow-on-the-Hill/ Hendon Central/ High Barnet/ Mill Hill East/ North Harrow/ West Harrow/ South Harrow. But we could include places like Hampstead for the 'intelligentsia' who would be covering all this from TV studios. The reason Stamford Hill was not included is that there are far lest Marxist Jews there being a religious settlement.

We simply have no idea about Jewish settlement, because it is largely an invisible Marrano parasitic intrusion. Google any town in England on Google Street and see how many Jewish business names you can see in the high street. They occupy high financial positions and en passant positions in councils, police authorities, education and so on in the remotest areas we still think compose white Britain. This does not include the massive growth of Mc businesses, i.e. franchises or branches of mega-Zion corporations like Halfords, Boots and the supermarkets etc. Anyway, if we are examining a politician or actor or comedian for example and we go to Wikipedia and find there is zero details about their parentage we can become suspicious right away. Wiki is Jewish-controlled, they even have seminars for Jews: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMBramnCg_s
    Absolutely in no way will Wiki allow academics to edit revisionist material away from the official Jewish narrative on Wiki. Wiki protects Marrano Jews by hiding their parentage on a massive and deliberate scale as you will observe if you use them frequently for this purpose. Hiding the mother's parentage is the main giveaway and if they won't release her maiden name.

One way to identify Jews is by common Jewish first names like David, Jonathan. A lot of the time we have to speculate on the basis of "If it walks like a duck...", and we look at the fruit of the tree. What is that person doing or saying which furthers the Jewish agenda? And what behaviours and agendas are they promoting which are Jewish? And what size and shape is their nose? Peter Cook for instance was not only extremely Jewish in his attitudes and morality but had a huge nose. Cook's mother's maiden name was Mayo: Recorded as Mayhow, Mayhew, Mayo, Mayhou, Mayho, Mayow and others, this is a surname of either Hebrew or French origin. Cook was a Holohoaxer, like many Jews he displayed an obsession with Nazis in his work and used his satire to malign Hitler even more than Dudley Moore who was a declared Jew. Take the case of suspect Jews like Ricky Gervais the entry is enough to convince me of Marrano heritage:
"Gervais, along with siblings Larry (born 1945), Marsha (born 1948), and Bob (born 1950), was born and raised in Whitley, Berkshire. His father, Lawrence Raymond "Jerry" Gervais (1919–2002), a Franco-Ontarian from London, Ontario, Canada, emigrated while on foreign duty during the Second World War and worked as a labourer and hod carrier. He met Gervais' mother, Eva Sophia (née House; 1925–2000), who was English, during a blackout; they settled in Whitley."
The improbability of the job of the father (who may have done this work for a while but who I envisage in a study full of books given his son's middle class and erudite demeanour) is striking, as is his obviously anglicized names Lawrence and Raymond (which conflict with Wiki's claim that he was a French Canadian) and the description of his mother as 'English' is farcical. Eva Sophia are both frequently used Jewish girl's names, I cannot imagine any English person of that time giving their child such names, and while House could be also non-Jewish name it is most often a translation of Haus; most probable German or Jewish. Think of 'Colonel House' and President Wilson during the First World War. In Germany, Haus is used as surname also among Jews (many Jewish surnames are of German origin). There are certainly less chances that a German woman was to be found in Berkshire than a Jewish woman given England's history of immigration and how odd that these two people with foreign names or birth should come together in Berkshire, a very English county at the time, it seems most likely they came together because they were Jews. Look at his fruit.

Marrano Jewish stars in British TV's Steptoe, Till Death Do Us Part, St Trinians, Pete and Dud, Monty Python and all the way up to Alas Smith and Jones, Harry Enfield, and The Fast Show seduced many into an ethnically-suicidal liberalism. In British comedy I have not found one famous name who I do not suspect of being a Jew. In other fields, if you look carefully into the parentage you will either find confirmation, or a refusal of Jewish sites like Wiki to list anything at all about their family background. Harry Lauder the quintessential Scot was a Jew, Kenneth Clarke's father was a Jeweller, suspected paedophile Michael Gove's mother was a Jew and then he was adopted by Judao-Christians. Cliff Richard, Jimmy Savile, Richard Branson, Una King MP a black Jew, Mervyn King, and Kate Middleton is a Jew with a long Sephardic ancestry as is her son Prince George.

Since Jews operate through intermediaries, it's important to understand organisations controlled by Jews. Many people are aware that Freemasons are an international front for Jews, though of course the operations are concealed. Many people are aware by now that Communism was Jewish. Large portions of United Nations documents were drafted by Jews. It's also important to have some feel for organisations' structures—the way in which legal systems are perverted from the top down, criminal activities (for example central bank fraud, and paedophilia) hidden, assets isolated then removed by Jews, whistleblowers trying to expose Jews ignored, demoted, or removed, and newcoming intermediaries (think of Harold Wilson, Tony Blair, President Wilson, both Clintons) assessed and either promoted or rejected.


This is a big subject; I know only of incomplete discussions. But

Talmudic Information. The Talmud, and other books (including the Bible) contain coded information. I haven't succeeded in finding any overview, but there are many suggestive fragments.
'Jewish' Dates, 'Holy Days', Word and Number Symbolisms, Moon and Star Beliefs, 'Kosher' Beliefs — need to be understood. Events on 'Yom Kippur' (the date varies during the year), meanings of e.g. 9/11, the year (I think 2040 is counted as 5800), ought to be routinely noted by fighters against 'Jews'.
Pattern Matching is partly something that comes from experience. Many people are aware—once it's pointed out—of Jewish TV ads showing mixed race couples; of film and TV showing whites as evil; of suppression of race crimes facts; of history intentionally shown as a matter of repetitive lies, the Holohoax being just one example. Here's another example, of induction from experience, from The Occidental Observer: “'Border Protection' seems to mean nothing more than limiting the ability of law-abiding, documented Whites to travel freely, safely and comfortably, while turning a blind eye to floods of illegals, rapists, vandals, and welfare claimants.” Another example, which needs wider experience of reading into different times, is the observation that England after the establishment of the Jewish 'Bank of England', and France and England after the Jewish 'Revolution', and recent times after wars, all saw huge rises in the cost of living. ...
... but pattern-matching involves analysing very detailed choreography where large events are concerned. Propaganda aimed to get war(s) is fairly obvious, now, to many people. False-flags/ psyops have existed for centuries; these days people can be informed by Internet, but whether this will survive Jewish attacks remains to be seen.
    Hilaire Belloc wrote a good account of the 'marvellous' acting ability of individual 'Jews', but omits the effects obtained (e.g. 9/11) by joint actions and carefully-planned joint lies. Here's part of my review of Derren Brown's Confessions of a Conjuror quoted at some length, because people need to understand the attention to detail which groups of 'Jews' make when planning a scheme:
Very unusual style of book, which in some ways reflects a magical 'effect'—not just the mechanics of a trick, and not just the mechanics plus 'patter', but the full choreography. There's one trick, punctuated by reflections on the past, reflections on psychology, and reflections on the sorts of things people do. Brown comes across as a man of calculating shyness, as he decides how to approach some group of people who may, or may not, be receptive to his trick with 'Bicycle Brand' red-backed cards. His disquisitions include theatrical conventions ..., the box style of After Eight mint chocolates, the realisation that his parents were once as young as he is now ... homosexuality, and party events with famous people. A note at the beginning states this is a work of non-fiction, but adds that some details have been changed 'solely to protect the privacy of others', though I haven't been able to deconstruct the meaning here: at one point he describes a faux pas with Hugh Grant at a party—I simply can't work out which, if any, parts of this anecdote may have been changed 'solely' to protect privacy. Brown is good on introspection of everyday events, such as descending in a lift—possibly the need to design 'effects' needs great attention to small details....

[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Academic Subjects (and the supposedly serious 'quality' media):—
Bear with me here: I suggest a simplified scheme, in which each subject has three stages: [1] Invention or prompted start-up; [2] Expansion and Establishment; [3] Senescence and Decadence. Examples:–
[1] Printing (i.e. 'moveable type') clearly had a vast influence; its novelty can be compared to electronic communication now. Anthropology was started as exploration made it clear the earth was widely populated; and peoples' beliefs were considered suited for comment and sturdy. Linguistics (arguably) was German, triggered by historical investigations into languages and dialects. The 'periodic table' of elements dated from the time when elements became identifiable, and many were being discovered, as were regularities n their properties. Computerised architecture is newish; engineering calculations permit the design of strange new building shapes.
[2] Established subjects are (among a myriad examples) calculus, which dominates and shapes mathematics despite its age; architecture, a mixed bag of techniques; microchips, which replaced earlier techniques such as tubes (thermionic valves) and fluidics and transistor circuits. Others, showing signs of senescence, include official studies in Shakespeare, history, and psychology.
[3] Any established subject is likely to have a fringe of unadventurous or backward-regarding types, but who nevertheless want to make a name for themselves. The end of the nineteenth century, after a century of solid progress, had florid outbreaks of oddities: curved space, the infinite, Freud, theories of light, relativity, surrealist literary experiments, odd music, political oddities. Technological subjects may be replaced by new technologies; softer-edged subjects trying to embrace vast subsets of everything may be replaced by different or newer selections of targets. Photography had a huge effect on visual art, and it seems fair to say some of the floundering was simply the impetus of the past. At present, biology research, space research and nuclear research are dominated by fraud.

My implied view here is that Jewish attitudes have had a special influence here; their outlook is opposed, or firmly indifferent, to innovation, which in my view is almost entirely the province of whites. The attitude of 'success' in a narrow sense ensures that they will flood into subjects of type [2], even when there is nothing further to be mined. It's not surprising that American universities are mired in evasive nonsense. Nor that this is increasingly being noticed, as subject after subject descends into type [3] decadence, high cost, and irrelevance.
    Typical puzzle: Do men love war and excitement, and is it true that human aggression will always dominate events?
    Answer: In my opinion, this is not known for certain. Jewish influences have secretly dominated for at least four centuries, and their instinctive love of lies, deaths for goyim, and Jewish exclusivity have had considerable influence. Wars have been promoted by propaganda, and outbreaks of wild enthusiasm have been reported by Jewish media. They may be lies. If Jewish influence were moderated or removed, it seems likely that violence would be confined to more rational objects.

Here's a repeat peep into the penetration of 'Jews' into English academic life in the 20th century; these examples are all from 'social science', history, and so on Academic Jews in Britain c. 1900-1970
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Philosophical Mistakes in 'Marxism': Russell thinks aristocrats were always idle rich. He thinks (p 199) there are three chief sources of wealth outside the USSR—land and natural monopolies, inheritance in the family, and business enterprises. Despite his efforts to refine the philosophical ideas of sets, he confuses and misclassifies: he doesn't notice differences between the opium wars for a few Jews in China, and British-built infrastructure in India; or biologically essential needs, and relaxation and trivia and comfort; or such knowledge as the wealth of all parts of a country, and loans and other legal but hidden facts—information as power is absent from Russell—the logical links missing from the maxim 'knowledge is power' are missing in Russell.
    More failures by Russell to analyse and differentiate include: Wars which add to debt owed to Jews, and wars with some other purpose; or education which is empowering, vs education which, even if difficult and challenging, remains unhelpful; or religions powered by careerists, vs more genuine belief systems. His chapter on religion is of course anti-Christian, but, as with (((freethinkers))) in Britain then and now, is careful to avoid frank discussions on other religions, notably Jews. His view on slavery is traditional post-1833 Britain, and as with 'imperialism', doesn't examine detail. His chapter on education under communism is taken from one book published in the USSR, and has painful myopia: only 5% of Russians actually attend the school he describes, for example—presumably Jews?—and Russell seems largely unaware of differences between peoples—the Russian Empire had a wide variety of states and local arrangements, including of course Jews, just as the (((British Empire))) had local criminal gangs, local military groups, and protectorates, colonies, republics, and so on. His interpretation of state education is of course from Plato; he doesn't attempt to describe how it might work. And of course his views on money don't include its possible, and true in practice, uses in making money for its handlers, which is not the same as 'capitalism'.
Economics: You will find little or no mention of paper money and the Federal Reserve etc. or the 'two-tier' effect of overwhelming economic power.
      An interesting extract from a translation of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion stares '... the dictatorship imposed by the Jewish race will be a financial, industrial, commercial dictatorship. At least for a time, it will show itself as little as possible. The Jews have endowed the commercial, industrial and financial world with the Joint Stock Company, thanks to which they are able to hide their immense riches. They will endow the entire Christian world with that which they have bestowed on France: the Joint Stock Company for the exploitation of nations ...'.
      The Jewish effects on economics ought to be thoroughly explored. In mediaeval times, land ownership was often clear to everyone. 'Forests' were areas exclusively for the Monarch to hunt. The Church's land ownership was evident, and abundant. Oxbridge College lands were clearly marked. Guild buildings were easily identifiable. State monopolies were held by named individuals. Anonymous ownership came later; Société Anonyme to this day (S.A.) means a limited company.
      'Usury' is another enlightening concept: not just interest, but, in particular, penalties for defaulting, as indicated in The Merchant of Venice. Traditionally, the Catholic Church is widely believed to have thundered against interest. But in fact the Church took money from Jews, who boasted 'our money built the cathedrals'. I suspect the Church protected the Jewish monopoly in exchange for forbidding money transactions to whites.
      The rule of thumb is to assume Jewish interests care nothing for non-Jews. Looking at events in that is helpful in understanding. For example, the savagery of the attack on the Peking (Beijing) Winter Palace was profitable for Jews the their opium trade. Would this have been carried out in the interests of the whole of Britain? It's impossible to know, but is certainly arguable. In the case of India, what seems to have happened is that Jews took the profitable and lootable items; but the British also built railways and modern cities and introduced sanitation and a civil service, which they naturally prefer to emphasise. The Vietnam War was profitable for Jews—profitable enough to raise the US debt to Jews to new, high, levels. And to leave 'veterans' in some cases mad or homeless. Would this have been undertaken without Jews? It's impossible to know; but possibly not. Would the British have invaded South Africa c. 1900, purely to set up Jewish wealth?
      One reason for Jews to promote invasion of white countries, since about 1945, is that they get money for housing, 'educating', and other services, at the expense of white taxpayers. Health services are assumed to be for everyone; but the Jewish view is, only if they make money from them. There's a selective attitude to education: Jewish education, however ridiculous, gets preference. It's hardly necessary to point out that vast amounts of assets and weapons and money are given to Israel.
    Typical puzzle: I watched BBC TV on the Budget. They talked about tax on beer and cigarettes, and small changes on income tax.  But it said nothing at all about what I've read are huge annual interest payments on paper money interest, nothing on huge ring-fenced foreign 'aid', nothing on the true costs of immigration, and nothing on the costs of the European Union.  Why on earth not?
    Answer: Yes, this is typical divide-and-rule.  Paper money interest goes to Jews; deliberate damage to all white societies is Jewish policy, hence the indifference to vast wastes of money, and the encouragement of immigration of ineducable aliens.  The BBC just report stuff like you get 10p less, he gets 10p more, to stir up people and distract them from serious discussion. As to the BBC, here's my review of a junk book by the BBC's official 'economics expert' Peston: Who Runs Britain?
    Typical puzzle: It seems Robert Mugabe, dictator in Zimbabwe, has a few billion stashed away somewhere. Why does nobody discuss (for example) how much was looted from people in Zimbabwe, and how they might get it back?
    Answer: Jews have supranational control of money, which they use to control lawyers and others. There will be no discussion of how he was advised to do collect money, and how it was done.
    Typical puzzle: Is it true that economic problems cause emotionalism, racism and venom in societies?  It's what my lecturer said, but he only seemed to have one doubtful example.
    Answer: I'm afraid because of Jewish propaganda almost all historical events are ignored—and this is part of Jewish ideology: goyim don't matter.  Just as counter-examples,
  • The view received via the largely Jewish media before 1914 encouraged the view that Germany was an enemy and Russia was backward and vicious. Very few people had evidence or experience to counter these ideas. They were supported by typically vague statements, for example that British and American business would benefit from war damage.
  • There were no noticeable economic problems when Britain declared war on Germany in 1939 and the 'world' part of WW2 started. There was plenty of emotionalism etc, but it was promoted by the Jewish media. Many Americans didn't want to spend years living in tents during that war.
  • The US's long racist war against Vietnam was not an outcome of economic problems.
  • The 'Great Depression' had a set of economic problems, but for example the US didn't declare war on blacks or on south American Hispanics
  • The was and is long-standing 'venom and racism' against Germany and eastern Europeans—to this day, lies about them dominate in the 'mainstream' media, which is Jewish-owned. There is no obvious connection with economic conditions.
  • Britain has had economic troubles for years, at least among the people not part of the Jewish money and propaganda groups. And yet there is virtually no venom, even among people who seem likely never to be able to buy housing in their own country.
  • Germany under the NSDAP became richer than it ever had been. Presumably you imagine it was 'racist and venomous'.
Politics: The traditional first opinion was Aristotle, who said 'Man is a Political Animal' (in effect; and in Greek) meaning people live in towns. Possibly this statement opened the way for a few thousand years of important error. If Aristotle had mentioned the possible links between men and their cities, it would have been more obvious that the Jewish idea of national politics is a secret bond, a layer, a distinct secret group, cutting across other polities and nations, and in a position to harm them.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Sociology: On the post-1945 expansion of education, You will find a complete absence of serious discussion about Jews. This is partly because many hypotheses about Jews are unattractive, so naive people will simply find them unbelievable. Consider such issues as deliberate dumbing-down, by misteaching reading by look-say, and the sudden rise of 'guru' figures from nowhere (e.g. in the UK from 1945 Fred Schonell). In the USA, race mixing and 'busing'; quotas and 'positive discrimination' to disadvantage whites; control of textbooks by Jewish publishing interests; control of education newspapers; selective funding and imposition of debt on whites; the anti-white changes in teacher training courses and syllabuses; covertly-funded teaching and student union 'leaders', who are often planted Jews; sacking teachers who get good results; promoting professors who suit the Jewish viewpoint—A J P Taylor, A J Ayer, G R Elton, J Rotblat are old post-1945 examples in Britain; selecting Jews who in fact aren't qualified—Martin Gilbert, Gerald Fleming; the selling-off and destruction of books from libraries, notably in the 1990s; people-trafficking from sub-Saharan and north Africa, a known aim of Jews and therefore likely to be financed by Jews in some indirect way; poisoning water with fluorine compounds.
Sociology of Law: the changes in law instigated by Jews (for example in the 1960s) remain unexamined. The actual drafting of laws by fanatical Jewish groups, on subjects such as race and religion and immigration, remain unexamined.
Sociology of Race and Immigration and the Jews who pushed for it in all white countries, and pushed anti-white action in Africa, remains a taboo topic to this day.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

History: For more than 60 years, Jewish money and media control has led to a straitjacket of lies about the world, particularly the Second World War, the post-1945 international organisations—UN, World Bank, IMF, NATO—the 'Cold War', nuclear weapons, and American wars and their profits.
      The last 500 years: Jews have a different model of nationhood from most nations, which are patterned on the idea of a long past of fairly homogenous people. Their attitude rather is that of a single nation, BUT spread across other countries. It's clear that (say) 6% could be domiciled in 16 territories. This implies mutual support. At the present day, they have paper money, more or less secret language, concealment, control of the media, control of laws from the top down, both in making them and enforcing them, their own yearbooks and groups and synagogues, and alliances with crypto-Jews. Plus bolt-holes for escape.
      This suggests a new interpretation of events since about 1492, including variations dependent on colonies. The New World had settlements, invasions, and co-operations with earlier inhabitants. There were local variations; but roughly speaking: Because of Papal ordinance, what's now Mexico had Spaniards; and Brazil had the Portuguese. North America had mostly Protestants, mainly from England and Germany, but also the Netherlands and Scandinavia. But South Africa had Dutch, and Australia/New Zealand later mostly British. The French Empire was largely in Africa, with disputes over India. Even later, Hong Kong was taken over, after the Opium Wars, fought for Jews. The influence of Jews has of course been kept secret, but serious historians ought to look at all these examples, and compare and contrast them. The influence of Jewish banks in the Netherlands, and later in London, ought to be taken into account, notably in the founding of the USA, and in hostile attitudes to Russia—which still exist. The Portuguese elite seems to have been forced into intermarriage with Jews. The Spanish elites were connected with Jesuits, another Jewish groups, who also established themselves, for a time, in Japan. France's Catholics were largely ousted by Franc-maçonnerie. As far as I know, there is no non-Jewish historian who has delved into all of this, certainly no well-known author or group of authors.
      Internet gives people all around the world unprecedented exchange of ideas: for the first time, people experience something like the feeling that emperors, kings, popes, literati, heads of organisations and armies must have felt. There must be changes in outlooks as new ideas, and interpretations, are exchanged. In just a couple of weeks, I've seen (1) Jan Lamprecht, in South Africa, pointing out that Second World War Germany was under-equipped with tanks—their success was more like a guerilla war, co-ordinated, rather than the Jewish-controlled USA, UK, France, and USSR, where the soldiers were controlled by compulsion rather than desire to fight. (2) Johnson in the USA pointing out that the Southern States are under attack, not only by race replacement, but by removal of their past—monuments, statues, place-names, facts about cheap buy-ups after destruction. The motives for the 'Civil War' (nothing to do with slavery) are clearer. (3) The so-called 'Abrahamic' religions were obviously made up by Jews (or substitute Judaics or another name); both Christianity and Islam were constructed—probably to placate and weaken whites, and to incite Arabs into violence, for use as a controlled army. (4) Evidence for religions having once provided most of the opportunity for leisure and paid idleness; but now, with vastly increased productivity, paid dissemblers proliferate—in science, technology, art, education, law.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Religion: The truth about the Talmud, and the Qu'ran, is at last starting to emerge, thanks to the work of activists. But the inertia and mental deadness of Protestants, Roman Catholics, and American groups, is contemptible.
      As a result of intense and repetitive deception promoting 'Holocaustianity', it's clear that Jewish deception at the time of the Roman Empire may have hijacked Christianity, or invented it from nothing. Here's an article on this issue—I've repeated the idea several times, with different wording, since it's so different from many people's received views. And it's likely enough that Islam, with a similar pattern including 'Abraham', 'Jesus', angels, but with a Jewish viciousness presumably designed to appeal to Arabs, had its Quran and addenda, and alphabetic script, written by Jews.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Health and Medicine: The hypothesis of Jewish damage against non-Jews leads to examination of such things as compulsory medication. Fluoridation of drinking water is a perfect example: calcium fluoride has a different structure from the calcium phosphate of teeth and bones, and tooth enamel. It can only do harm, and one has to assume that is part of its purpose. Another example is the "master race" idea, not in the Jewish supremacist sense, but as put about by propagandists against eugenics: even the healthiest and strongest population still has to go through birth, education, and death; such a population would not be omnipotent. Why would anyone want populations with increasing genetic defects and problems? Another example is the possibility that salt has been demonised to weaken peoples' health.
[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Conclusion. The influence of Jews in varied fields needs examination of evidence.  There's a comparison with testing other hypotheses. For example, consider the discovery of oxygen: hypotheses were tested about burning, breathing, underwater life, rusting, yellowing of paper, sponginess of lungs ... and the common factor of oxygen proved to explain all these things. It helped explain haemoglobin in blood, and photosynthesis in plants. It was generalised later: electron donation, and other substances such as sulphur as 'oxidants'.
    Air contains more than oxygen: the discovery of nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and water vapour (water invisibly held in air) helped explain how plants can grow in weight without using any solids, how fires can be put out, how some seemingly-normal air can be fatal, why water can condense from cold air, and why some climates can be stiflingly uncomfortable.
    Anyone who refuses to take the trouble to learn about air can be compared with someone who refuses to learn about Jews: very many phenomena cannot be understood.

A good hypothesis has huge covering-power, which is the reason people who understand it, like it, and use it. The common factor of Jewish influence explains a large number of otherwise apparently unconnected malicious events: why should foreign criminals in white countries be set free? Why was nonsense like Freud perpetuated? Why is the Church so totally useless? Why are Public Inquiries invariably a waste of time? Why do politicians say nothing about money supply? Why is there no reporting of massacres of whites in South Africa? Why has obviously useless immigration been encouraged? Why do TV ads show white males as stupid? Why has education been dumbed down so much? Why does TV news contain so much rubbish? Why is Obama tolerated when he's not a citizen? Why is paedophilia encouraged? Why have Russian Orthodox Icons, at one time everywhere in Russia, almost disappeared? Why do TV ads show mixed-race families? Why should an alleged 'holocaust' be made special? Why do foreign enemies, who people have never heard of, suddenly pop up all over Jewish-owned media?

I encourage people to look for themselves—knowledge by acquaintance may be more permanent than knowledge by description. I'm afraid we must assume that vicars, hack writers, hirelings etc. will continue their lies and indifference.

Unfortunately, it's unreasonable to expect women to contribute much to revisionism; there are too many ways to apply pressure to them, and in any case they have too little motivation; it's easier to leave it to men.  But there is one serious possibility: the non-white world may come to understand Jews, so that Indians, Chinese, Japanese, Brazilians, Russians may understand the 'west' better than the west itself does.  I think it's fair to say this would be a new situation.

[Guide to Perplexed about Jews - Top of Page]

Writing, HTML © Rae West at the various dates listed. This version (three separate files, to save space: 1 Jews in history and the emergence of revisionism; 2 Miscellaneous articles; and 3 'Guide to the Perplexed') first uploaded together 2016-Feb-02. Some mobile phone tweaks 2016-10-23. Enlarged box with links (near the top; to make it more readable) 2016-12-17 23:55