Post-Jewish Materialism?

Whatever else you may say about Modernity, we are squarely in the Age of the Jew, and our ideas reflect that, both for good and for ill.

To illustrate the latter, the notion of Modern Materialism* as “Philosophy” is fraught with problems, which I hope to make inescapably obvious in the present blogpost.

But by way of driving the point home before I delve into it, I would analogize “Materialism as Philosophy” to the predominately (Talmudic) Masonic** Solid-State “Physics” that has plagued “Science” through the modern era and which the developed world is only now beginning to cast off. For just as a “Physicist” who said there is only matter and not energy would have about five minutes to gather his things and leave campus, so too the “Philosopher” who says there is only the material and not the rational should probably find another trade—or at the very least another more vocational department—ASAP. (!)

Okay, that should bring the (as yet) concrete thinkers up to speed on what in the world this blogpost is talking about. Now takeoff.

The Materialistic “Philosophies” I have in mind could be broadly categorized as a “Jewish school”—or rather a “post-Jewish school”—because their main proponents are Marx touted by your “Communist” or “Socialist” extremists and Rand hailed by your “Capitalist” or “Individualist” fringe***, both of whose philosophies seem purely reactionary against a status quo that favored the landed gentry over the vagrant/ghettoized Jew, though this quite Judeocentric concern of their respective luminaries is of course the one thing that the rhetoricians, who so slavishly adhere to each “Philosophy” that it’s scary, never seem to get around to enunciating. (!)

It is impossible to overstate the influence of Marx (and Alinsky, also Jewish) on the American left or that of Rand (and Rose, again Jewish) on the USA right, nay indeed both sides’ mutual codependency (since only entrenchment can create the illusion of intellectual credibility for either side of this fundamentally Satanic [which is merely the pre-modern expression of Materialism] dichotomy).

These Jewish men and women are seen as infallible gurus by each side’s leaders. (For example, Obama and Clinton both made their careers from Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, which he dedicates to Lucifer. [Check out the book for yourself if you don’t believe me!]) There is no serious question as to whether these “Schools” of “Philosophy” constitute Cults of Personality, so I won’t stoop to addressing that particular straw man, which can only be heard from the mouths of well-paid agents at any rate.

Suffice it to say the two Arch-Materialisms cannot be called “Philosophies”, and both for that exact same reason!

And this isn’t a commentary on Jews per se, but rather on Western modernity in which Jews just happen to feature with unusual prominence. Mostly prior to modernity, there certainly have been Jewish philosophers, such as Philo of Mileto and many more. But the ways of the mentally inflexible Modernist and Materialist cannot be called Philosophies but Anti-Philosophies, by their own definitions, no argument required. (!)

It’s actually eerily similar to how modern Western Christianity first consumed itself then started in on philosophy, so too modern Western Judaism!

Not that I am displeased with our recent return to India, that dark and mysterious root of all Philosophy (and therefore also religion), but I do wish more people would wake up and stop terming “Philosophy” cults of personality whose expression invariably opens with tiresomely limiting propositions.

Maybe the only practical application of this epiphany (which I hope by now you share with me), we need a new word to describe such spectacularly psychospiritually fragmented groupthinks. I’ll be honest, since I was a boy I enjoy a Lewis Carroll as much as the next kid, but if Carroll isn’t a Philosopher, then neither is Nietzsche. Rather, they are Philologists. And similarly, Marx and Rand should be called not “Philosophers” but “Shock Writers”. Many writers of fiction tell truths that the writers of nonfiction wouldn’t dream of stating blatantly. Conversely, some writers of nonfiction tell lies that the writers of fiction wouldn’t dream of even hinting at.

People who are emotionally secure enough to do their own thinking and neither force nor are forced by ham-handed epistles, of which America still has a cunningly silenced minority****, do not take seriously these Post-Jewish Materialists who have managed to control both sides of mainstream American public discourse, to whom insecure people glob on as a toddler might glob on to an adult’s leg.

In short, the term Philosophy means “the love of wisdom”, and yet the ideologue is a lover of polemics. What we have in the Post-Jewish Materialists is a thinly veiled antitheology to the extreme of Satanism, and such writing must needs be absurdist, superficialist and yes materialist.

Time to put on the political brakes, America: You’re headed straight for the Grand Canyon.

* By “Materialism”, I categorize those “philosophies” that stress matter over reason, as for instance Communism and Capitalism do. (See Satanism.)
** That’s why they’re predictably presented in a manner that’s so politically and emotionally anti-Papist.
*** Neither camp has a clue about Distributism or Familism, naturally, and WordPress doesn’t recognize them as words!
**** See this article on Barney, Inc. and Jacques Maritain.