Zionism as Homo-Nationalism

(This article was not written by myself, but I consider it worth reposting here, despite not fully agreeing with all its contents. The link between fascism and homosexuality used to be well known, but “Left” discourse in Amerika wants to sweep all this under the rug. This article is reposted here in the interests of exposing the nature of White Nation “Left” discourse. The original blog post can be found here)
————

Introduction, or, The Zionist Voyeur

In her biography of the Labour Zionist leader Meir Ya’ari, the historian Aviva Halamish quotes the following passage from Ya’ari’s diary, depicting a night-swim with a male friend in the Kineret:

In the shade of an Acacia grove emanating scent and moon shadows.  We were tired and heavy like lead […] a revolt started to stir in me. “Hey man, you are 23. It’s Saturday. Freedom beckons you.” I sprang up. I pulled my friend, with the gentile’s face, by his shirt. He awoke immediately. Quickly we undressed. “Brother, let’s fish the moon in the water.” […] revolt and romantic fantasies were gushing in him too…we understood each other. We jumped into the water, rending their smooth surface and we frolicked until we were out of breath. He walked in front of me. Silver streams ran down his naked copper arms. They moved in a menacing rhythm and filled me with fear and desire. He went deeper and deeper, up to his shoulders, up to his neck, up to his head – to fish the moon out of the water. In moments like this you can betroth death.  Suddenly we heard some workers singing loudly. They approached us on their boat. We snapped back into “reality” and ran to the beach.

[1]

Halamish uses the passage to describe Ya’ari’s psychological state just before meeting A.D. Gordon and joining a kvutza where he could channel the angst and idealism so plainly apparent in his writing. She does not, however, comment on the homo-erotic facets of the text. Ya’ari is very explicit about the “fear and desire” that his friend, with his “face like a gentile’s” and “naked copper arms” incites in him. We may never know if Ya’ari would have acted on his desire since he and his friend were interrupted by the arrival of “workers” and that pregnant moment was cut short.[2]

My point here is not to out Ya’ari. His “true” sexual orientation is of no concern to me. I would like to argue, however, that the scene described by Ya’ari is paramount to our understanding of Zionism’s gender politics. It is a primal scene, echoed and repeated in the writing of Zionist (male) ideologues.[3] In this scene – which is always narrated from the point of view of an “old”, physically weak Jewish intellectual – the narrator encounters, surveys and sometimes gropes a young, beautiful and muscular “new Jew”. In the eyes of these ideologues, the “new Jew” is ever an Other – he is always the object and never the subject of desire, leaving him a present but elusive ideal.

The thesis of the present paper is that this encounter between the effete, neurotic Jewish male intellectual and the wholesome, broad-shouldered Jewish male worker/farmer/soldier is the main fantasy underlining the Zionist project. Zionism is a gendered answer to the dual threat of European anti-Semitism/assimilation and more specifically to the masculine anxieties of assimilated European Jewish men. The emasculation of European Jewish men by the surrounding Christian societies is well documented in scholarly literature; the Jewish man was considered by anti-Semites to be feminine, physically weak, submissive, passive and generally “queer”.[4] He wasn’t, to put it bluntly, man enough. As Sander Gilman and others have shown, major Zionists thinkers internalized those pernicious stereotypes.[5] Thus, if Zionism was aimed at the “regeneration” of the Jewish body politic, that body was specifically a male one.

I would like call a nationalist project that is concerned with the rehabilitation of the male body and psyche “homo-nationalism” because that strand of thought is produced by men and for men. The term was coined by the queer theorist Jasbir Puar and used to describe members of the LGTB community who hitch their ideological wagon to the liberal nation-state, while being used by the state as an excuse to imperialize homophobic, “terrorist” third world countries.[6] I would like, however, to use the term differently: I understand homo-nationalism as a continuation of homo-sociality, that is, a socio-political formation that is primarily concerned with the anxieties of- and interaction between men.

Contrary to Puar, I am not interested in the sexual orientation of the members of the nation. In fact, one of the aims of this paper is to show that rather than being a sublimation of sexual desire, non-sexual desires – in this case the desire for a healthy, virile, body politic – inform and shape sexual ones.

For that reason I do not treat Ya’ari’s description of his friend as an indication of homosexuality. The term homosexuality itself presupposes an innate, primal desire that is unhindered and unaffected by external circumstances.[7] I would suggest that Ya’ari desires his unnamed friend because the latter represents a national ideal that Ya’ari himself could never embody. This does not foreclose on the option of genuine homo-erotic feelings – just on the exclusivity of a homo-erotic reading.

Whatever Ya’ari’s feelings toward his object of desire were, his need to identify with the goy-like, muscular and hetero-normative Other turns into a desire for the Other. I would suggest that identification turns into desire because the Zionist voyeur cannot see in himself the corporeal perfection he sees embodied in the Other. Thus identification, which hints at similarity, gives way to desire, which hints at some modicum of otherness.[8] But since Zionists desire normalcy – read, hetero-normativity – the homo-nationalistic desire must be disavowed by the desirer and redirected into other venues. And so, that sexually charged moment between Ya’ari and his goy-ish friend, who “goes deeper and deeper, up to his shoulders, up to his neck, up to his head”, a moment in which “you could betroth death” turns into coitus interruptus when a group of “workers” – standing in for the Zionist collective – bring the two men back into “reality”: rather than realizing the homosexual option, Ya’ari would channel this desire into agricultural work and political activity.

The following is divided into two parts. First I will look at the scholarship of Daniel Boyarin and Todd Presner, who tried to historicize the invention of the modern (Zionist) Jewish man by locating his origin in fin-de-siècle German culture. Secondly, I will survey works by literary scholar Michael Gluzman and film scholar Raz Yosef, who studied the ways in which Israeli art has endeavored to prop up the masculine ideal of the muscular Jew, while at the same time demonstrating the necessary sacrifice needed to maintain it.  

Part One: The Rise of Homo-Nationalism

The historian George Mosse sees the ascendance of the European middle class and of European nationalism as inexorably linked.[9] From the French revolution onward, nationalist struggles were imbued with a moral tinge: patriotism, piety and perseverance were considered both nationalistic and bourgeois values.[10] The French revolution was also, according to Mosse, the moment when “the ideal of manliness came into its own”.[11] The new nexus of nationality/class/gender became prominent as the Jews of western and central Europe went through the process of emancipation, which allowed them to assimilate, to a limited extent, into gentile society. One could argue that modern anti-Semitism, configured as it was in scientific and racial language, was an attempt to differentiate between the assimilated Jew, who donned all the trappings of a bourgeois Frenchman or German, from genuine (read: Christian) Frenchmen and Germans. Assimilation, in other words, was understood by anti-Semites as dissimulation.

Although Christian fascination with the allegedly feminine Jewish body dates at least to the Middle Ages, the nineteenth century saw the medical pathologization of the Jewish body.[12] As the nation was seen more and more as an actual living body, the Jews’ stereotypically abnormal bodies marked them as national outsiders.

Jewish men bore the brunt of this new bio-political anti-Semitism. In the Yiddish culture which developed in Eastern Europe, the masculine ideal was of the scholar who devoted himself to his studies and was supported by his wife. This ideal, of course, negated most gentile masculine values: physicality, strength, independence, material success and sexual domination.[13] Since the scholarly Jewish man seemed to embody the very “countertype” to the ideal gentile man, he became the main target of a bio-political anti-Semitism which understood each individual body as a component and a representation of the national body. The Jewish man could not be a part of the body politic because he could not embody the national-masculine ideal.

This is the starting point of Daniel Boyarin’s project in Unheroic Conduct. The Yiddish yehsiva bokhur, claims Boyarin, was indeed gentle, effete and decidedly un-hetero-normative. But within Yiddish culture these characteristics were not considered faulty – on the contrary, they were desirable.[14]

Although Boyarin does not attack assimilation head on,[15] the fact that he locates the marginalization of the gentle Jewish man in the works of Freud and Herzl, two assimilated Viennese Jews, should alert us to the fact that Boyarin is trying to re-negotiate the term of Jewish assimilation. Both Freud and Herzl, he argues, internalized anti-Semitic stereotypes and gentile sensibilities.[16] Boyarin looks at the vicissitudes of Freud’s Oedipal theory in relation to Freud’s own homo-erotic attraction to Wilhelm Fliess and to his Jewishness.[17] Freud’s disavowal of his feelings towards Fliess came at a time when the modern category of the “homosexual” was gaining traction.[18] This category poised homosexuals as feminine men, and thus as metaphorically equivalent to Jews; conversely, it meant that Jews were queer even before the term acquired its modern meaning.[19] “The Oedipus complex” as Boyarin puts it eloquently, “is Freud’s family romance of escape from Jewish queerdom into gentile phallic heterosexuality”.[20] I believe that Freud’s insistence on the heterosexualization of the oedipal complex[21] validates my claim that non-sexual desires – in this case, Freud’s desire to be a manly gentile – can and have determined sexual desires. In Freud’s case this influence is quite literal as his writings have shaped the modern theory of sexuality to an unparalleled extent.

Zionism – at least its German strand – is for Boyarin “the most profound sort of assimilation” and a project whose aim was to “transform Jewish men into the type of male that [the Zionists] admired, namely, the ideal “Aryan” male”.[22] Herzlian Zionism, then, is an attempt at “an honorable conversion of Jews to Christianity, understood as it always was for Herzl as not a religion, but as Kultur itself, as civilization”.[23] The only way to convert to German-ness without inciting the same rancid bio-political anti-Semitism that was already apparent in Herzl’s Vienna, was to conduct the experiment outside of Europe.[24] The Land of Israel then becomes a heterotopia and a heterochrony, representing at the same time the biblical period and “a Camelot in the desert or rather, a Vienna on the Mediterranean”.[25]

The Jewish state, according to Boyarin, was supposed to be a re-education camp where “manly, honorable, dueling…Zionists” would transform the groveling, scheming Mauschels of Eastern Europe into true men.[26] The choice of the Land of Israel as the site of the Zionist Champ de Mars, then, had to do with more than religious longing: it served as a site of a “colonialist performances of male gendering…Herzlian Zionism imagined itself as colonialism because such a representation was pivotal to the entire project of becoming ‘white men’”.[27] The Zionist colonial project, according to Boyarin, is itself an example of colonial mimicry.[28] To build on Boyarin’s argument, Zionism, up until 1948, was a simulacrum of colonialism: a carbon copy without an origin (a metropolis) that needed to hitch itself to changing surrogate empires. 1948 was the beginning of an imperialization process which came to fruition in 1967: the creation of a genuine Israeli empire, with a “white” metropolis and “black” peripheries. If we take Boyarin’s analysis seriously, then the so-called occupation cannot be thought of as a conjectural historical accident; it is the fulfillment of Herzlian Zionism’s primal fantasy – to become a race of conquering, manly gentile-Jews. The constant belligerence demonstrated by Israel and its inability to let go of the settlements in the West Bank are creating time and again situations where Zionists have to affirm and re-affirm their colonial manhood.

Let us turn now to Todd Presner’s book Muscular Judaism. Presner locates the invention of the muscular Jew trope at the end of the nineteenth century, as part of a whole set of “regenerative” politics.[29] He stresses that muscular Judaism was at the same time a response to the deeply nationalistic and racist discourse prevalent in turn-of-the-century Germany, and an incorporation of its major themes.[30] Presner goes as far as claiming that “the birth of the muscular, healthy, and masculine Jewish body had some of the same cultural, social and intellectual origins as the Fascist body”.[31]

The term muscular Judaism was coined by Max Nordau during the second Zionist congress (1898). According to Presner, Nordau aimed at “the cultivation of certain corporeal and moral ideals such as discipline, agility, and strength, which would help form a regenerated race of healthy, physically fit, nationally minded, and militarily strong Jews”.[32] The need to regenerate the Jewish people stemmed from Nordau’s perception of the Ostjuden as “weak…powerless…Luftmenschen” and from the demographic decline of the rapidly assimilating Western Jewry.[33] As I have suggested in the introduction, when Nordau spoke of weak Jews he was referring to weak Jewish men, and indeed “women [were] conspicuously absent in the vast majority of discursive practices and representations of the muscle Jew”.[34]

Nordau made a name for himself as the author of entartung (1892), a book in which he attacks degenerated art – characterized by “overweening vanity and self-conceit” – and advances instead “an unflagging investment in the lucidity of science and the rationality of the Enlightenment”.[35] But degeneration is more than an intellectual state; Nordau connects cultural degeneration with “race-based, physical deformities”.[36] He, in fact, talks about the “end of race”, a play on the term fin-de-siècle.[37] It is clear, then, that for Nordau regeneration must include a prominent physical component. In fact, mental regeneration cannot come about without a physical one, and vice versa.

Nordau thus demanded from the Jews of his time soldierly discipline and Spartan devotion in their attempt to regenerate the Jewish people.[38] One important venue of regeneration was physical exercise. “In the cramped quarters of the Jewish ghetto” argued Nordau, “Jews forgot how to move their limbs freely; in dark houses, their eyes blinked nervously…their formerly strident voices turned in to mere whispers”.[39] Muscles are thus not just an indication of regeneration, but also a metaphor for regeneration, since muscles can atrophy and be re-built again.[40] One could say that in looking at biblical warriors for inspiration, Zionists were trying to recreate a Jewish “muscle-memory”.[41]

The Jewish gymnastics associations which spread throughout Central Europe at the turn of the century were seen as a national – if not always Zionist – endeavor.[42] This attempt at regulating the Jewish body, claims Presner, should be understood as a part of a bigger Jewish bio-political project that aimed at charting “the birth and death rates of the Jewish people, their life expectancies, their patterns of diet and habituation, their marriage regulations, their susceptibility to illness, their contraceptive practices and other statistical indicators of the population’s vitality”.[43] The health of the individual Jewish body, then, becomes both a component and an indicator of the general Jewish Volkskorper’s state. Not surprisingly, it was around that time that Alfred Nossig founded the Association for Jewish Statistics, which published its own journal, edited by Arthur Ruppin.[44]  Even before the establishment of a substantial Zionist apparatus in Palestine – marked by the arrival of the same Ruppin in 1907 – all those Zionist organs – sport associations, bureaus and journals – were geared towards state formation. In Presner’s words, “bio power functions…according to the ways in which regulative discourses on sexuality consolidate the will to a state.”[45] To conclude, Presner shows that German Zionism had developed as a bio-political project aimed at the regeneration of the Jewish body politic through Jewish body politics, and which created a “will to a state” by imbricating statism, statistics and (male) stateliness.

Part Two: The Pink Platter

Up to this point we have been concerned with the invention of the muscular Jew by Jewish intellectuals. Let us now look at the way Israeli writers and artists have questioned the myth of the self-assured, straight muscular Jew. Reading the scholarship of Michael Gluzman and Raz Yosef, we will see that Israeli writers, who were supposed to both embody and represent the new Jew, took apart the possibility of being an uncomplicated, cardboard cutup of a muscular Jew.

In his book, The Zionist Body, Literary scholar Michael Gluzman looks at a wide array of works by Jewish and Israeli novelists which deal with body- and masculine politics. Diaspora writers, like Bialik and Mendele Mocher Sforim, express a complex relation to the Jewish body, mocking it and denouncing Jewish male femininity and passivity while at the same time re-affirming their loyalty and admiration of Yiddish culture.[46] Y.H. Brenner, the enfant terrible of the pre-state literary circle criticized heavily the Zionist attempt to regenerate the Jewish man by having his protagonists immigrate to Palestine only to discover that their exilic anxiety and impotence travelled with them to the Promised Land.[47]

But Bialik’s, Abramovich’s and Brenner’s protagonists were all Eastern European men, already infected from birth with Jewish powerlessness. It is when Gluzman looks at Israeli novels that the impossibility of ever inhabiting the Zionist male ideal becomes clear.

He Walked through the Fields (1947) by Moshe Shamir is widely considered a seminal novel of the 1948 generation and its protagonist, Uri, the quintessential Israeli masculine fighter.[48] Uri, a kibbutznik and palmach officer, is supposedly a picture-perfect embodiment of the Zionist ideal, up to and including his “beautiful death”: jumping on a grenade to save his soldiers.[49] Gluzman, however, reads Uri’s death as a suicide, resulting from Uri’s Schreber-esque inability to assume the cultural position expected of him by his father.[50]

Uri’s breakdown is articulated in gendered and sexual terms. Shamir uses Mika, Uri’s older, non-sabra lover for two purposes: first, to serve as a countertype to Uri – she is female, feminine and non-native.[51] But more importantly, her descriptions of Uri’s body allow Shamir and his male readers to enjoy Uri’s physicality while eschewing the homo-erotic label.[52] When we compare Uri’s portrait to earlier scenes where Ya’ari and Herzl enjoy openly the presence of a beautiful male body, we can see that Israeli culture has fully embraced the invention of modern sexual definitions, and has become “normal” – that is hetero-normative and homophobic. For the 1948 generation – if not even earlier – homo-nationalistic desire must be circumvented through the female gaze, thus allowing for homo-eroticism in the guise of heterosexual desire.

Alas, Uri – despite his desirability – cannot assume the societal position prepared for him by the kibbutz (which here encapsulates and epitomizes Israeli society). Uri lives in the shadow of his father, an almost mythical figure in the kibbutz, and serves for Mika as a second-best replacement for his father, with whom she was in love.[53] The sexual encounter between Uri and Mika is written from Uri’s perspective, and instead of being registered as a moment of masculine conquest it is plagued with anxieties about inadequacy.[54] Uri, who cannot seem to measure up to his father, starts expressing masochist feelings, involving a strong wish to “be a victim” and “to be sacrificed”. His masochism and, one might argue, the generational masochism implied in the Altermanian “silver platter” ethos, results from the inability of the sabra sons to embody the masculine fantasies of the founding fathers.[55] Uri’s death, then, is a wish-fulfillment borne out of the impossibility of ever fully answering the clarion call of the Zionist super-ego.

Earlier I have suggested that given Zionism’s masculine fantasies, Israeli society should be read as a nation-wide boot camp. Yehoshua Kenaz’s novel Infiltration (1986), based on his own experience as a soldier in the 1950s, treats an IDF boot camp as a microcosm of Israeli society. The conscripts in the novel are infirm or disabled and thus already at the margins of Israeli masculinity. Nevertheless, their bodies are expropriated by the army, to the extent that one NCO yells at a private for damaging IDF property, that is, for cutting himself while shaving.[56] Turning those invalid youths into soldiers is explicitly described in gendered terms. Being a good soldier is synonymous with being – or rather becoming – “a man”.[57] Conversely, any conscript who cannot measure up to soldierly standards is branded “a female”. Gluzman describes Infiltration as an “encyclopedia of bodies”, most of them deformed in some way.[58] Immigrants, whether European or Arab, are portrayed in the novel as androgynous – the camp’s doctor, herself a camp survivor, is “neither a woman nor a man”.[59] Ben-Chemo, the laughable Arab-Jewish private performs a gender-bending belly dance that conflates femininity and Arabness.[60] Even the kibbutznik Alon, who seems to embody the Ashkenazi beauty ideal, has a heart murmur which prevents him from following in his father’s footsteps as an elite fighter. The novel ends with Alon’s suicide, and the similarities between him and Uri in He Walked through the Fields are obvious.[61]

The characters in Infiltration, all irrevocably marked as damaged by the IDF, engage in several forms of resistance; perhaps the most poetic of them is practiced by the protagonist himself, who narrates the novel in the first person. His form of resistance works, as Gluzman beautifully puts it: “contrary to the norms of personal narration, [as] we learn almost nothing about the protagonist. He makes his body disappear from the narrative and becomes an eye, a camera. By hiding his body, he tries to avoid the camp’s bio-politics, or at least watch it from a distance.”[62] The body is understood by Kenaz as a Kafkaesque surface on which the state inscribes its ideology. The only way to resist the statist inscription is to fashion the body into a separation wall by developing a “thick skin”.[63] The infiltration Kenaz writes about, then, is not that of the soldier into enemy lines, but of the state into one’s heart of hearts.

Film scholar Raz Yosef has written extensively about Israeli masculinity, and specifically about military masculinity. He understands Zionist masculinity as inherently masochistic: from the readiness for physical suffering expressed by the pioneers to the willingness of soldiers to lose life and limb for the nation, Zionist masculinity is deeply implicated in the pain and the destruction of the male body. Moreover, masochism allows new Jews to come to terms with the homo-eroticism inherent in Zionist culture without actually expressing it: the masochist gets off on the deprivation of pleasure and the disavowal of desire. The lack of any kind of sexual fulfillment then becomes a kind of pleasure in itself.[64]

Let us take for example the highly successful Israel movie Yossi and Jagger (2002). The movie depicts the love affair between two male IDF officers serving in Lebanon. Although Yossi and Jagger consummate their love physically, Yossi, who is Jagger’s superior, refuses to come out as gay despite his lover’s imploring.[65] At the end of film Jagger dies in combat. Yossi, visiting Jagger’s mourning mother cannot bring himself to tell her the truth about their relationship. Like Uri from He Walked through the Fields and Alon from Infiltration, the defected sabra must die in order to foreclose the option of queer Israeliness. Although Yossi comes out physically unscathed from his military service, he is still unable to come out as a gay man, confining himself to the closet, that is, to an emotional grave.[66] Tellingly, even a highly critical novel like Infiltration and a seemingly emancipatory film like Yossi and Jagger (which was produced and directed by Israel’s foremost gay power-couple, Eytan Fox and Gal Uchovsky), still succumb to the need to destroy the queer male body.
I would like to call this artistic trope “the pink platter”, after Alterman’s famous poem “The Silver Platter”. Alterman’s poem celebrates the heroic sacrifice of two Zionist fighters: a young woman and a young man.[67] I would like to argue that in order for this heterosexual sacrifice to take place, another sacrifice must be made: the disavowal of the possibility of a viable, happy queer existence, a disavowal symbolized in the continuous killing off of queer protagonists. I purposefully use the term queer rather than gay because I don’t believe that Zionism is inherently homophobic. Rather, Zionism is concerned with eradicating any kind of behavior that might brand Jews as non-normative. Thus, I believe, the toleration of gay culture in middle class Israeli culture is a mean of differentiating “white” Israeliness from the primitive Arabs (Jewish or otherwise) who surround it. In other words, it is exactly because gay-friendliness is perceived as normative in Western metropolises that the Israeli middle class embraces it. And so, while gay youths serve openly in the IDF, conscientious objectors, who are still viewed as queer and dangerous, serve sentences in military prisons for their refusal to enlist in the army. In Eytan Fox’s newest film, Yossi’s Story (2012), Yossi, the surviving protagonist of Yossi and Jagger, finally begins a relationship with a handsome paratrooper after years of self-denial. In contemporary middle class Ashkenazi Israel, being gay is alright as long as you are a veteran sleeping with other soldiers, that is, as long as your sexual choices are located well within the respectable ethnic boundaries of the nation.

Conclusion, Or, From Homo-Nationalism To Bi-Nationalism

In the present paper I have tried to offer a genealogy of Zionism’s relationship to masculinity. Using Boyarin’s and Presner’s work, I have suggested that due to the specific ways in which European anti-Semitism attacked Yiddish culture the care for the Jewish male body became Zionism’s most important cultural project. In the second part of the paper I have looked at the price Zionists and other Israelis have paid for Zionism’s constant need to banish the queer from the brave new Hebrew society.

I have also suggested that the alleged Israeli gay-friendliness is confided to certain sectors of Israeli culture which are concerned with keeping up with Western respectability. In other words, mainstream Israeli gay-friendliness is intimately tied up with Islamophobia. A true emancipatory project would be moving from homo-nationalism, a nationalism that is concerned with sameness and normativity, to bi-nationalism. Rather than a specific political program, I would like to use this awkward pun as an indicator that sexuality, gender and national politics are inexorably linked together. If homo-nationalism is indeed content with sacrificing its best and brightest on an altar of an impossible ideal, it should be replaced with a national contract that is willing to include the sexually, politically and culturally queer. One of the characters in Infiltration tells his comrade, a formerly religious soldier – “your body is still Jewish; it doesn’t know yet that it is Israeli”.[68] Maybe it is time that we claim our Jewish bodies – deformed, queer and imperfect as they are – back.  

---

[1] Aviva Halamish, Meir Yaari, A Collective Biography, The first Fifty Years: 1987-1947 (Tel-Aviv: Am Oved, 2007), p. 55. [Hebrew]

[2] Raz Yosef reads the same passage from Ya’ari in his “The Military Body: Male Masochism and Homoerotic Relations in Israeli Cinema”, Theory and Criticism 18 (Spring 2001), pp. 14-15 [Hebrew]. Yosef understands Ya’ari’s desire as a masochistic homoerotic desire, while I, as will become clear, understands it as an offshoot of a more general, national desire.

[3] The Zionist Body by Michael Gluzman (Tel Aviv: Ha-Kibbutz Ha-Meuchad, 2007) [Hebrew], recounts many such scenes: for example, Herzl groping a bunch of Jewish porters in Jerusalem (p. 21); The writer Yaakov Ya’ari Polskin describing the muscular blacksmith “Sander Hadad” (p. 24); Moshe Smilanski writing about “Huja Nezer”, a beautiful Russian pioneer (p. 26); Friedrich Lowenberg, Altneuland’s protagonist, meeting David Litvak, once a Viennese beggar and now a pillar of the Zionist state (p. 56); Aharon, the teenager at the center of The Book of Intimate Grammar, trying to see his best friend, Gideon, naked (p. 251); Moshe Shamir observing Uri, his protagonist in He Walked Through the Fields, through the desiring eyes of Mika, his lover (p. 195); and finally, a strikingly similar scene in Yehoshua Kenaz’s After the Holidays (p. 221). See also Boaz Neuman’s discussion of the pioneers’ auto-erotic fashioning of their own bodies in Land and Desire in Early Zionism (Tel-Aviv: Am Oved, 2009) pp. 157-176 [Hebrew].

[4] Daniel Boyarin, Unheroic Conduct, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996), pp. 10-11, 210, 222; Gluzman, The Zionist Body, pp. 13-14.

[5] Sander Gilman, Jewish Self-Hatred, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986), pp. 291-296; Gilman, The Jew’s Body, (New York: Routledge), p. 40; Gluzman, The Zionist Body, p. 19; Todd Presner, Muscular Judaism, (New York: Routledge, 2007), p. 34.

[6] Jasbir Puar, Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times, (Durham: Duke University Press, 2007), p. 2.

[7] See the introduction to David Halperin’s One Hundred Years of Homosexuality (New York: Routledge, 1990).

[8] In that sense, the desire that self-fashioned “old Jews” felt for new ones is “hetero-sexual” regardless of their actual gender.

[9] George Mosse, Nationalism and Sexuality, (New York: Howard Fertig, 1985), pp. 4-5.

[10] Ibid., pp. 6-7.

[11] Ibid., p. 7.

[12] On medieval perceptions of the Jewish body, see: David Katz, “Shylock’s gender: Jewish male menstruation in early modern England” Review of English Studies 50 (1999), pp. 440-462; Irvin Resnick, “Medieval Roots of the Myth of Jewish Male Menses”, Harvard Theological Review 93 (2000), pp. 241-263.

[13] Boyarin, Unheroic Conduct, p. 229.

[14] Ibid., pp. 51-64.

[15] And since he acknowledges the homophobic tendencies of rabbinical culture and the debt of LGTB rights movement to both Enlightenment and Liberalism, how could he attack a Jewish appropriation of those traditions?

[16] Boyarin, Unheroic Conduct, pp. 222, 277.

[17] Ibid., p. 212.

[18] Ibid., p. 208.

[19] Ibid., p. 210-212.

[20] Ibid., p. 213.

[21] That is, lusting after Mother and wishing to kill Father. See Boyarin, Unheroic Conduct, p. 219.

[22] Ibid., p. 276-277.

[23] Ibid., p. 294.

[24] Ibid., pp. 279, 295. See also: Todd Presner, Muscular Judaism, (New York: Routledge, 2007) p. 10.

[25] Ibid., pp. 295, 302-303. On the concepts of heterotopia and heterochrony, see Michel Foucault, “Of Other Spaces”, Diacritics 16 (Spring 1986), 22-27. One might suggest that in the light of Zionism’s desperate attempt to un-queer Judaism, the formulation of the Land of Israel as a hetero-topia acquires a second, gendered meaning.

[26] Boyarin, Unheroic Conduct, p. 296. One could also formulate Israel as a boot camp, where boys turn into men. Indeed, to a large extent Israel is one big boot camp.

[27] Ibid., p. 302.

[28] Ibid., p. 303.

[29] Ibid., p. xxiii.

[30] Ibid., p. 4.

[31] Ibid., p. 17.

[32] Ibid., p. 2.

[33] Ibid. Nordau was born Simon Sudfeld in Hungary, and re-invented (one might say “regenerated”) himself as the German intellectual Nordau.

[34] But not, as Presner stresses, from the actual praxis of “body culture”: Muscular Judaism, p. 12.

[35] Ibid., pp. 38-39.

[36] Ibid., p. 39.

[37] Ibid., p. 48.

[38] Ibid., pp. 55-56.

[39] Ibid., p. 58.

[40] Ibid., p. p. 59.

[41] Ibid., p. 61.

[42] Ibid., p. 107.

[43] Ibid., p. 108.

[44] Ibid., p. 109.

[45] Ibid., p. 111.

[46] Gluzman, The Zionist Body, chapter 2 and 3.

[47] Ibid., chapter 4.

[48] Ibid., p. 185.

[49] Ibid., p. 186.

[50] For an analysis of Schreber’s breakdown see: Sigmund Freud, The Schreber Case, (New York: Penguin Classics Psychology, 2003). In the movie version, Uri is played by Assi Dayan, Moshe Dayan’s son.

[51] Gluzman, p. 196.

[52] Ibid.

[53] Ibid., p. 200.

[54] Ibid., pp. 200-202.

[55] Ibid., pp. 204-205.

[56] Ibid., p. 222.

[57] Ibid., p. 227.

[58] Ibid., p. 229.

[59] Ibid., p. 231.

[60] Ibid., p. 232.

[61] Ibid., p. 233.

[62] Ibid., p. 234. My translation.

[63] Ibid.

[64] Yosef, “The Military Body”, p. 14-18.

[65] Raz Yosef, “The National Closet: Gay Israel in Yossi and Jagger,” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 11: 2 (2005), p. 283.

[66]

[67]http://jpress.org.il/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Skin=TAUHe&BaseHref=DAV/1947/12/19&EntityId=Ar00205&ViewMode=HTML.

[68] Gluzman, The Zionist Body, p. 209.

Hutu Power!

The Ugandan raised Indian academic Mahmood Mamdani states that the Rwandan Patriotic Front used Walter Rodney’s How Europe Underdeveloped Africa as standard educational material for their cadres (Mamdani, 44). Walter Rodney makes the argument that the physical differences between the Hutu and the Tutsi were the result of a caste system, one in which the Tutsi had plentiful access to milk and meat from their pastoral cattle herding, causing them to grow much taller than their Hutu co-patriots (Rodney, 195). One could interrogate such a narrative by asking whether or not these phenotype differences have caused difference in genotypes amongst the Hutu and Tutsi, but that seems neither here nor there. This conflict threw the entire region into war, a war some have called The Great War of Africa, or Africa’s World War, and threatens to reignite tensions at any moment in the future. In November of 2014, the leader of the Rwandan backed rebel group M23, Bertrand Bisimwa, warned that conflict could begin again soon because of unresolved grievances (AFP). The Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda, a Hutu group seeking to restore the majority Hutu rule in Rwanda, continues to operate out of the eastern regions of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, even though it has been given a deadline by the government in Kinshasa to disarm (Beith). A permanent solution to the crisis remains elusive. While the Hutu-Tutsi conflict is not the only conflict going on in Africa, there is a reason most observers have tied the 1994 Rwandan genocide to everything else that has gone on since within the Great Lakes region of Africa. Identity and ideology have collided in this conflict in such a way to drive most of Africa into the fray, and it is in the interests of all of Africa that there is a solution to it.

Rwandan society before the invasion of European colonialists was more hierarchal and feudalistic than anywhere else in Africa (Rodney, 198). A system was in place where a privileged aristocracy ruled the Kingdom of Rwanda, where control over cattle meant everything, and those who owned the cattle identified themselves as Tutsi. Like the feudal lords of medieval Europe, the Tutsi aristocracy were tasked with the military defense of the country by the ruling Mwami, and so had the force of arms necessary to enforce the social-system that benefited them. Writing in 1972, Walter Rodney states that the Hutu, the Twa, and the Tutsi evolved together to form the Rwandan nation (Rodney, 199), over a decade after the events of the Rwandan Revolution, or the muyaga (“Winds of Destruction”) had occurred in Rwanda. On Rodney’s own interpretation of the history of Rwanda, one would think the Marxist Rodney would see the events of 1959-61 in Rwanda as the final overthrow of feudalism in Rwanda, possibly with favorable comparisons to the celebratory attitude Marx and Engels wrote about the Great Peasants’ War in Germany. If the Hutu and Tutsi are indeed one nation, then the muyaga could have been nothing short of a great class conflict, one in which the masses of Rwandans overcame their centuries old oppressors. Yet Rodney passes over this event in silence, leading one to suspect this is why the Rwandan Patriotic Front has their cadre read this work in the first place. Whether or not the leaders of the Hutu majority originally turned a class division into an ethnic one, the division today is real. It is certainly just as real (if not more so) than the divisions separating the Spanish speaking peoples of Latin America, or the English speaking British settlers in Canada and America.

The 1959 Social Revolution brought the Hutu into power and ended the centuries old rule of the Tutsi feudal aristocracy. The uburetwa system of the Tutsi feudal lords was finally abolished, and a system of election by secret-ballot was setup (Collins, 51). A series of massacres ensued, leading to the exodus of tens of thousands of Tutsi into neighboring countries. The defeated Tutsi aristocracy that fled to neighboring Uganda would eventually create the Rwandese Alliance for National Unity (RANU), which was formed to facilitate the eventual return of all Tutsi refugees to Rwanda. The RANU would soon involve itself in Uganda’s civil war on the side of Museveni’s National Resistance Army, helping to bring him to power 1986. The RANU would change it’s name to the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) in 1987, and with their military experience gained in the Ugandan civil war, invade Rwanda on October 1^st, 1990 (Herman, 53).

It would be four years later before the RPF would militarily seize power in Rwanda. The initial invasion by the RPF was a failure. Paul Kagame, who was in the United States at the time, taking courses at a US military college (Herman, 55), was flown to Rwanda to take over command of the RPF. Under Paul Kagame’s command, the RPF militarily turned the situation around for the exiled Tutsi. Unable to defeat the RPF solely by military means, the ruling government in Rwanda would seek out an end to the civil war, leading to the Arusha Accords. While the RPF was able to turn its military success into partial government power, the Arusha Accords mandated eventual multi-party elections. The history of Rwanda, before and after the muyaga, and the recent invasion by the RPF from neighboring Uganda, would not translate into electoral success for the RPF, even assuming ever single Tutsi minority in Rwanda would vote for the RPF. There was no possibility of an electoral victory for the RPF on the horizon (Collins, 116). The RPF would surely have realized this, and it is why today they still reject the concept of rule by the majority as illegitimate (Reyntjens, 41).

The time from the formation of the Broad Based Transitional Government (BBTG) established by the Arusha Accords to the start of the Rwandan Genocide would be about 9 months. Intense fighting would resume by RPF forces in the beginning of February and end before the month was out. The plane of president Habyarimana would be shot down on April 6^th, 1994, and within two hours, the RPF would begin military operations on two fronts (Herman, 56). The Rwandan Genocide had started, and the killing would last three months before the RPF would capture the whole of Rwanda and drive the government forces and much of the Hutu population into neighboring countries where they would setup refugee camps. Of the 700,000 or so Titsu killed, over 800,000 Tutsi exiles would come to Rwanda after the RPF came to power (Prunier, 5).

The refugee situation created by seizure of power by the RPF in Rwanda would lead directly to the Congo wars. The illusion of a national unity government would collapse after the Kibeho massacre (Prunier, 42), with most of the prominent Hutu members of government resigning. Eighteen months later, on the pretext of getting rid of another militarized refugee camp on the Rwandan border, Paul Kagame wound send the armed forces of the RPF into neighboring Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo). This would set off a chain of events not only leading to the overthrow of the hated Mobuto (whom the heads of most of the states of Africa had conspired to overthrow as early as 1994 (Prunier 67)), but to the first and second Congo wars, and the military intervention of nearly all of the governments of Africa into the conflict, not once, but twice.

The fuel for the Congo wars and the conflicts in the Great Lakes region of Africa continues to be the divide between the Hutu and the Tutsi. Like the state of Israel, the national motto of the Tutsi regime in Rwanda seems to be “Never Again” (Gettleman), and the international community has largely looked the other direction when it comes to the violence of the RPF regime itself. Despite being based around the Tutsi ethnic group, the RPF managed to get 75% of the vote in the last election. Even though the US government is a staunch ally of the RPF regime, the US embassy in Rwanda even called the vote into question, noting several irregularities (Embassy).

While there may be many grounds to question the racialization of the conflict by proponents of Hutu Power, the Tutsi counter-narrative itself would lend support to the Hutu as the majority of the Rwandan people seeking their right to fully partipate in society. If the events of the 1959 Social Revolution in Rwanda were not one ethnic group overthrowing their oppressors from another ethnic group, then it can only been seen as the culmination of a class conflict against a feudalistic aristocracy. The remnants of this ousted feudal aristocracy then fled the country as exiles, only to return decades later with an army to reimpose their will on a peasant population that had overthrown them. Even the events of the Rwandan Genocide itself could be interpreted in the framework of classwar. The narrative of the RPF and its backers doesn’t hold up to scrutiny and critical interrogation anymore than the ‘Hamitic Hypothesis’ does. The only political solution that comes to my mind is a thorough-going Pan-African socialism, one that is capable of weaving the bits of truth contained in both the Hutu and Tutsi narratives, and rightfully recognizing that the majority of the oppressed in Rwanda are the people with the right to rule their nation.

—————

Beith, Malcolm. “Congo Rebel Group Faces Military Action Over Failure to Disarm.” Bloomberg, 30 Sept. 2014. Web. 03 Dec. 2014

“DR Congo’s M23 Rebels Warn of New Conflict Risk.” Agence France-Presse, 7 Nov. 2014. Web. 03 Dec. 2014.

Collins, Barrie. Rwanda 1994: The Myth of the Akazu Genocide Conspiracy and Its Consequences. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. Print.

“Embassy of the United States Kigali, Rwanda.” U.S. Embassy Observation Mission to the 2013 Chamber of Deputies Election Statement. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Dec. 2014.

Gettleman, Jeffrey. “A Wound in the Heart of Africa.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 04 Apr. 2009. Web. 17 Dec. 2014.

Herman, Edward S., and David Peterson. The Politics of Genocide. New York: Monthly Review, 2010. Print.

Mamdani, Mahmood. When Victims Become Killers: Colonialism, Nativism, and the Genocide in Rwanda. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 2001. Print.

Prunier, Gérard. Africa’s World War: Congo, the Rwandan Genocide, and the Making of a Continental Catastrophe. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2009. Print.

Reyntjens, Filip. The Great African War: Congo and Regional Geopolitics, 1996-2006. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2009. Print.

Rodney, Walter. How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. London: Bogle-L’Ouverture Publications, 1972. Print.

Formation of the White Nation

The greatest theoretical contribution of Joseph Stalin to Marxism was his precise and clear formulation of the National Question. Lenin called Stalin a “marvelous Georgian” for writing this article, and Trotsky would backhandedly compliment it by claiming Lenin ghostwrote the whole thing. The area of Georgia was then, and still is today, a place of many, many different nationalities all living side by side, a crossroads between Europe, Asia, and the ‘Middle East,’ so it is no wonder Lenin would want a Georgian to write an analysis of this issue.

In the context of North America, the Bolsheviks were always explicit about the existence of a Black Nation. The Comintern would expel Jay Lovestone from the America CP for refusing to support this thesis, which was passed in 1928 by the Comintern and which laid out the theoretical essentials of the issue.

What is often not stated explicitly by this thesis is the existence of the White Nation. Much like the historical formation of the Black Nation, which came together out of a bunch of different Africans who spoke different languages, so too did the White Nation. If anything, the historical differences between who is in the clubhouse in the White Nation and Black Nation has been the difference between exclusivity. Different European ethnic groups were excluded at different times, and often only begrudgingly accepted by the ‘white’ masses into the White Nation, where as the Black Nation has been more open and fluid in who is and is not a part of it.

Many books have been written on this integration process into the White Nation. Karen Brodkin has wrote How the Jews Became White Folks. Noel Ignatiev wrote How the Irish Became White. Jennifer Guglielmo has written Are Italians White? (guess what the people of New Orleans thought in 1890, when they directed one of the largest mass lynchings in American history toward Italians). Paul Mishler’s Raising Reds has an interesting discussion about the role the American Communist Party had in integrating various (mostly Eastern) European nationalities into the White Nation. Thomas Bell’s novel Out of This Furnace is a story about how it took three generations for a Hunky immigrant family to finally became ‘white.’

In a liberal spoof article, Pat Buchanan is made to say that after the re-election of Obama, “The great White nation will never survive another 4 years of Obama’s leadership.” Not realizing it was a spoof, I thought this was an interesting observation at the time, because there is almost never talk about the White Nation on the ‘Right’ (and certainly never on the Labor Aristocratic “Left,” who are even more obsessed with “race” ideology) only about a “white” “race” (and this was no exception, though I didn’t realize it at the time). The ideology of the masses of the White Nation has always tended to think of itself in terms of the race-construct, no matter how self-contradictory the notion is. One of the more curious examples of this self-contradiction in “race” ideology is that of Eric Thomson, who popularized the ZOG concept amongst self-proclaimed white nationalists in his essay Welcome to the ZOG-World. After railing against what he perceives as the Zionist Occupation Government ruling over the White Nation in America, Eric Thomson ends his essay with the bizarre slogan “Our race is our nation!”

One has to wonder if it never occurred to Eric Thomson that European Jews are just as lilly-white as he is. It certainly has occurred to the vast majority of the mainstream ‘Right’ in America. It also certainly has occurred to powerful Zionist leaders like Netanyahu, who lived in America for years, and certainly had many chances to talk to the masses of the White Nation while living in Pennsylvania. In fact, there is a similar issue in Israel today, as the dominant ‘ethnic’ group has always been the lilly-white Ashkenazi Jews. The Iraqi Jew Rachel Shabi wrote an excellent account of the discrimination faced by the Mizrahi Jews within Israel in her We Look Like the Enemy: The Hidden Story of Israel’s Jews from Arab Lands. Another Iraqi Jew, Naeim Giladi, has written extensively on the discrimination of the Ashkenazi Jews toward everyone else in Israeli society. Even within the Zionist Entity known as Israel, “race” ideology trumps religious identity.

This is the fundamental contradiction of the American extreme ‘Right’. Back in 2006, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote an article titled Schism over Anti-Semitism Divides Key White Nationalist Group, American Renaissance about this divide, without going into too much ideological detail. The Jewish White Supremacist Michael H. Hart got up and screamed at David Duke, calling him a “fucking Nazi” for suggesting that Jews rule America. David Duke, interestingly enough, has joined the Zionist-side of the debate over the Khazar theory, parroting arguments by extreme Zionists against the research of Israeli geneticist Dr. Eran Elhaik, which has conclusively shown Ashkenazi Jews are related to the populations of Georgia, where the Khazar empire once stood. This fundamental contradiction that divides the American ‘Right’ into two inherently opposed camps was seen by MIM as a basis for agitating the masses of the White Nation. This contradiction is why MIM once said it would consider liquidating it’s communist work and making a bee-line straight toward Ron Paul.

On the “Left” in America, it is generally permissible to deconstruct the mass “race” ideology of the White Nation, such as Ted Allen does in his The Invention of the White Race, but this literature itself is also problematic. As Sakai points out in Settlers: Mythology of the White Proletariat, Ted Allen invents a narrative about early events in Euro-Settler history of America to paint a picture of “racial” harmony that never existed. Sakai picks apart Allen’s narrative about Bacon’s Rebellion, showing that far from this multi “racial” unity against governor Berkeley’s tyranny or whatever, Bacon’s Rebellion was actually a Euro-settler revolt in protest of the restricting of settler-expansion, which utilized slaves in the end in order to fight for the right to steal more native land. Theorists like Ted Allen only want to go halfway toward the deconstruction of ‘whiteness,’ without really explaining the true nature of the social-cohesion of the White Nation masses.

The film Birth of a Nation is closer to the truth. President Woodrow Wilson said of it that “It is like writing history with lightning.” While the concept of “whiteness” was invented in the early days of colonial America, the existence of the White Nation comes later in time. While the inherent contradiction in the “race” ideology of the masses of the White Nation makes it a fluid concept, to such an extent that the majority of the masses of the White Nation don’t even seem to stop and consider whether George Zimmerman was actually a ‘white’ guy or not, it did not cement into its final form until after the American Civil War. The Civil War and its aftermath would settle the dispute between Americans that were descendants of the original colonialists and the hordes of poor European immigrants flooding America’s shores seeking a lifestyle reminiscent of early American settlerism.

Opening shot: Against the Leading Liars

This opening post will suffice as an introduction to the tone and style of this blog. While I generally prefer to go to enemy territory directly, the English-language “Left” spaces are some of the most heavily moderated places online. One will quickly find that the moderators are almost always either faggots and/or Zionists. Just like ‘real’ “Left” organizing on the ground in Amerika, the online sphere always, always defers to faggotry. Just as Voltaire said, “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” Criticism of faggotry from virtually any angle on the Amerikan “Left” is a one-way ticket to ostracization. Mainstream ‘Right’ acceptance has similar constraints, but with Israel and Zionism taking the place of faggotry.

Open discussion forums can be penetrated rather easily. A combination of Tor and disposable email accounts goes a long way on places like RevLeft. The great thing about RevLeft is that they don’t actually remove content objectionable to the Zionist pedophile Labor Aristocrats that run that site, so the message one is trying to get out is saved in perpetuity. This is in contrast to the Zionist faggots that run /r/communism, who routinely erase any messages they don’t like, making engaging with such a forum less appealing.

A tougher challenge are blogs. Getting a message out over some “Leftist” blog is generally left up to the moderation policies of the individual(s) who control a blog. Being ‘polite’ is sometimes all one needs to get a message out, but this is impossible with some of them. Places like KKKasama generally totally moderate everything before allowing it to get through. For a long time, the Disqus format of The North Star, combined with nearly absent moderators, allowed all sorts of fun possibilities, before its audience and writers dwindled to nothing (though it appears the crypto-Zionist Louis Proyect is trying to relaunch that shithole).

Hence the creation of this blog. This blog gives me a platform to attack people I don’t like, in a way that (hopefully) can’t be subject to censorship. And my first target, is the Leading Liars “Communist” Organization (the so-called “Leading Light”).

My first real encounter with the Leading Liars was over Facebook. Like any good CIA spooks online, they are always completely anonymous. They told me enough to figure out their operations are primarily focused in Denver Colorado, and they even tried to get me to come visit them there, offering to pay my travel expenses. I declined at the time, though perhaps it would have been good to see the CIA’s Denver operations up close. I got them to send me some of their material instead, which, as expected, was of far higher quality (printing wise) than I had ever seen from any traditional “Left” organization in Amerika, except maybe the Wallace Global Fund-ed International Socialist Organization.

I broke off any serious engagement with this organization after discovering their support for the rantings of the White Nationalist B.R. Myers. Anyone who has spent any serious amount of time within the tiny-world that is the “Left” fringes of the Amerikan Labor Aristocracy knows that the DPRK is universally hated. The rhetoric of the parasitic White Nation masses, it’s “Left” Labor Bureaucrat leaders, and it’s Kike-loving ‘Right’ wing is all virtually identical. So naturally this sent off red-flares in my mind, and I understood the Leading Liars were no different than the rest of the White Nation “Left.”

The Leading Liars love B.R. Myers, and the next time I was confronted with this book was from a young female Kike while working in a First-World student “mass” group (a waste of time if there ever was one). So I downloaded it and read it, and it became evident to me B.R. Myers was a very conscious White Nationalist. The book is aimed at “Left” audiences, and the whole premise of the book is founded on the inability of your typical Amerikan “Leftist” to understand the difference between a “race” and a Nation. That is because the ideology of the White Nation sees no such distinction. So Myers, either knowingly or just taking for granted standard White Nation ideology (my bet is on knowingly), blurs the distinction at every possible opportunity, so the nationalism of an Oppressed Nation is read by the “Left” reader as being akin to the ideas prevalent in the minds of the masses of the White Nation. The Race-Nation worldview of the White Nation and its corresponding national self-identity is force-fitted onto the DPRK, a trick that is only possible because the Left-wing of the White Nation uncritically accepts most of the same premises of the masses of the White Nation, minus the extremes of anti-black prejudice.

Beyond this, most of the rest of the book consists of dubious anecdotes, which may be real or completely fictitious (and anyone who has seriously investigated the lies spewing from Occupied Korea knows the puppets in the South make up the most outrageous lies constantly). One that caught the attention of the Leading Liars was an anecdote about a Northern general and not allowing “one drop of ink” into Korea via miscegenation. This is considered ‘evidence’ for a general racialized worldview alleged to be typical throughout Korea and actively promoted by the Workers’ Party of Korea. But the Leading Liars and B.R. Myers are trying to pull a fast one here. Amerikan race-ideology sees Koreans, Vietnamese, Japanese, Chinese, etc, as all being part of the same “race.” The masses of the White Nation only see one undifferentiated mass of Gooks. The race-ideology that the Leading Liars and B.R. Myers are trying to pin on Korea, even if all their claims are taken at face-value, make no sense here. People who think in racial terms don’t propagandise their fellow race-brothers the way the Leading Liars and B.R. Myers admit both North and South Korea do. If anything, anti-Japanese sentiment is even more pronounced in Occupied Korea, being exploited to great affect by Unified Progressive Party leader Lee Jung-hee during the recent presidential debates in Occupied Korea, where she pointed out Park’s father had the Japanese name of Takaki Masao.

So the more idiotic Oppressor Nation “Left” readers of B.R. Myers, including the Denver-based Leading Liars, will see “racism” here, even though the race-ideology of the White Nation masses isn’t the least bit compatible with such sentiments. The Amerikan race-ideology sees the Koreans and Japanese as being indistinguishable Gooks. The masses of Korea and the Workers’ Party of Korea, if they held to such racialist notions, would see the Japanese as their fellow Yellow Brothers in Arms. This is, after all, how the majority of the White Nation masses see Israel. The Israelis are their fellow White Blood Brothers up against a darky Arabic horde. The White Nation looks at the history of the second World War and condemns Hitler because he dared to kill their fellow White Brothers, not because the Nazis said racist things. The first World War is viewed as a tragedy for the same reasons: look at all the dead Europeans (i.e., fellow White Brothers). The Left-wing of the White Nation has a similar extreme rejection of any dividing up of Whiteness. In my prior First-World student activist work, right around the time the little Kike-girl was using B.R. Myers’ shit to attack the DPRK, a random student came up to me at a table where a conversation was going on about the socially-constructed nature of Whiteness. This student couldn’t contain himself, and had to interject with the oh-so-genius idea that “White is white!” Do the Leading Liars imagine the Korean masses going around screaming “Yellow is yellow!” in some racialist parallel to the thinking of the White Nation masses? Of course not. The Leading Liars, B.R. Myers, the entirety of the bourgeois media, the political police of the Labor Aristocracy, and the Mainstream ‘Right’ all are completely unified in their hatred of the DPRK, and they want to make sure no one looks to their example for any reason at all. The work of B.R. Myers is meant as a “Left” thought-policing for the White Nation, as the Mainstream ‘Right’ will just tell their followers “Gook gook gook” and be done with it.

The Denver-based Leading Liars have returned to the issue of the DPRK a few times since then, most recently with regards to the Zionist Hollywood faggot film “The Interview.” While I knew some of the details of the film, it wasn’t until I read this review that I became aware that this Zionist Hollywood hit-job tries to depict Kim Jong-un as a faggot. This fact, if anything, shows Hollywood knows what it is doing. Hollywood often tries to send a dual message in its films, one for your typical member of the White Nation who won’t think too deeply about the film, another for the ‘intellectually’ inclined White Nation elite. For instance, the anti-Iranian film Argo opens with brief explanations of the nature of the conflict. This is to fool any moronic “Left” movie critic that the film is not explicitly propaganda aimed at riling up the masses of the White Nation for war against Iran on behalf of their White Blood Brothers in Israel. Here the message to the masses of the White Nation is that the DPRK is ruled by faggots, and by extension, communists are always faggots (despite Marx and Engels being explicitly anti-faggot and equating faggotry with pedophilia).

It should be obvious to anyone who has seen the “Commander” of the Leading Liars in that horrid video they recently produced, that the “Commander” is indeed a faggot, a faggot with all the same tendencies as the rest of the parasitic social-fascist “Left” in the White Nation. Despite the line of the Leading Liars on First-World gender activism, they are not actually opposed to the lines spewed by White Nation faggot-worshipping social-fascists. The Leading Liars, for instance, have no qualms highlighting alleged anti-faggot stories about the DPRK in their glowing review of B.R. Myers’ propaganda piece. While the Leading Liars claim to oppose social-fascist faggot-worship in the First-World, they have no problem echoing First-World parasites who want to attack foreign governments on the basis of their line on the imperialist-created faggot identity. It’s only a hop, skip and a jump for the Leading Liars to attack the Workers’ Party of Korea for not replicating the faggot-worship of the social-fascist parasite White Nation “Left,” to attacking the ZANU-PF or Hezbollah for not kow-towing to Western created pervert identities.

While the Leading Liars are actually writing for a “Left” audience for the White Nation, like other White Nation “Left” groups, they love to parade around any recruits from other nations they can find. The stuff their Bangladeshi recruit writes is much more interesting than anything “Commander PF” writes (“PF” obviously standing for Patriotic Faggot). And it shows that, for any actual revolutionary anywhere in the world, the National Question is absolutely vital to understand, and the ruling class surrounds themselves with sexual-perverts as sort of a shield between them and their Labor Aristocracy servants.

The Patriotic Faggot “Commander” of the Leading Liars has spilled considerable amounts of virtual ink trying to tarnish the National Question as it relates to revolution. It is a common theme running throughout this faggot’s writings. The “Commander,” writing under another pseudonym in the comments, tries to connect the DPRK to “White Power” cults. The point, again, is to play on the stupidity of your typical White Nation “Leftist,” who can not distinguish between race and nation, and who has never heard of the Labor Aristocracy in their entire “radical” careers. It is meant to scare the White Nation “Leftist,” to instil the idea that support of the DPRK is akin to support of typical ‘Rightists’ in the White Nation.

You’re not supposed to ask why such people might be reaching out to the most anti-US government sources they can think of. Like Amerikan Holocaust Deniers attending a conference in Tehran, a connection between the DPRK and “White Power” cults is supposed to scare any right-minded “radical” away from doing something similar.

But let us digress for a moment and recall some important words of Lenin:

The disease is a protracted one; the cure takes longer than the optimists hoped it-would. Opportunism is our principal enemy. Opportunism in the upper ranks of the working-class movement is bourgeois socialism, not proletarian socialism. It has been shown in practice that working-class activists who follow the opportunist trend are better defenders of the bourgeoisie than the bourgeois themselves. Without their leadership of the workers, the bourgeoisie could not remain in power. This has been proved, not only by the history of the Kerensky regime in Russia; it has also been proved by the democratic republic in Germany under its Social-Democratic government, as well as by Albert Thomas’s attitude towards his bourgeois government. It has been proved by similar experience in Britain and the United States. This is where our principal enemy is, an enemy we must overcome. We must leave this Congress firmly resolved to carry on this struggle to the very end, in all parties. That is our main task.

The key point here is the imperialists can not rule without a loyal Labor Aristocracy. The White Nation Labor Aristocracy is actually in charge of imperialism. Groups like the International Socialist Organization perform a rearguard function for the traditional Labor Apparatus, which is why imperialist NGOs give them hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. Smashing the power of the bourgeoisie in the White Nation is only possible by smashing their Labor Aristocracy. This Labor Aristocracy has no interest in socialism, even if they claim to. They live better than “socialism” could ever give them right now. They are bought off and bribed, and perform the hard work ensuring the system of imperialism continues without a hitch. These people are the main enemy of the people of the entire world, and destroying them is the main task of any Leninist organization.

And they are social-fascist faggot-worshippers that hate the DPRK. Just like the Patriotic Faggot “Commander” of the Denver-based Leading Liars.

Nowhere does Lenin say people who believe race-ideology nonsense are the enemy. Lenin didn’t say our main task was fighting the masses of the White Nation that think in race-ideology terms. Lenin didn’t say it was particularly nasty elements of the Mainstream ‘Right,’ or even fascists or anything else. The main enemy is the Labor Aristocracy and their “Left” ideology. The dumbo-racist ‘whites’ don’t rule Amerika. The Labor Aristocracy does.

In fact, the people that the Patriotic Faggot “Commander” is using to scare the White Nation “Left” off from the DPRK, are the greatest internal security threat to the US government. J. Sakai, author of the most excellent “Settlers: Mythology of the White Proletariat,” openly acknowledges this reality. To quote from his essay The Shock of Recognition:

Obviously, rightist political views that touch on fascism are held by many white Americans. They’re conditionally loyal to the government (and in the government) only because their level of prosperity and privilege is so high that why should they lift their faces from the trough? But if the u.s. capitalist class left it to a “democratic” vote of its white citizens, known fascists like David Duke would be in the u.s. senate, there would be no W.T.O. but also no Civil Rights Act, and much of America would proudly fly the Confederate flag of the slavemasters. The imperialist State’s largest domestic security priority is not terrorism, the ghetto or the border as they pretend, but restraining and defusing white settler rebellion to the right.

The truth here is startling and it isn’t in the least bit vague. The new fascism is, in effect, “anti-imperialist” right now. It is opposed to the big imperialist bourgeoisie (unlike Mussolini and Hitler earlier, who wanted even stronger, bigger Western imperialism), to the transnational corporations and banks, and their world-spanning “multicultural” bourgeois culture. Fascism really wants to bring down the World Bank, WTO and NATO, and even America the Superpower. As in destroy. That is, it is anti-bourgeois but not anti-capitalist. Because it is based on fundamentally pro-capitalist classes.

The question anyone who seriously wanted to destroy imperialism should be asking is “Why is the most serious domestic security threat to the US government reaching out to all the foreign enemies of it?” Or rather, the question anyone who seriously wants to destroy US imperialism should ask themselves “Why does the “Left” in the White Nation oppose this?”

The Patriotic Faggot “Commander” of the Leading Liars likes to roleplay himself as leading the masses of the Third-World against the First-World. So why does the Patriotic Faggot “Commander” hate the biggest internal security threat to Amerika, while simultaneously attempting to smear the biggest enemies of that same government as being in league with these elements?

The answer should be obvious. The Patriotic Faggot “Commander” of the Leading Liars wants nothing to do with the destruction of Amerika. This is why the Patriotic Faggot “Commander” wants to liquidate the National Question in the North Amerikan context. To think about it leads one naturally to think about the Balkanization of Amerika. The Patriotic Faggot “Commander” wants none of this, going so far as to shit on the settler analysis of Sakai. The Patriotic Faggot “Commander” sees the First-World as one united whole, and the job is for the Leading Liars to organize the Third-World to confront this mass in toto. Doing this also means wanting to lead these same Third-World masses to overthrow their own governments, no matter how hostile they are to Amerika. The Patriotic Faggot “Commander” doesn’t actually have any vision how the people of the world should militarily confront the First-World. What the Patriotic Faggot “Commander” wants is to actually replicate social-fascist faggot worship inside the Third-World, to replicate the standard practice of White Nation “Left” cults, except with a more obedient population. Of course such a thing is impossible, and such a vision is only suitable for recruiting the extreme fringes of the White Nation “Left” to do CIA work in other countries.