Mammonism, Brexit and The Rest of Us

July 01, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

Gilad Atzmon interviewed by Alimuddin Usmani

Alimuddin Usmani: Following the victory speech by Nigel Farage, you wrote on your Facebook wall: “It is easy to grasp why British workers support Farage and not the Labour Party.”

 Can you explain this further?

Gilad Atzmon: Farage’s ideas are coherent and consistent. They reflect the feelings of the poor, the oppressed and the working people who have been reduced into a workless class. Whether Farage can help them is an open question but he offers a clear vision of change fuelled by nostalgic glory and a strong sense of belonging.

Corbyn, on the other hand, has little to offer although this is not entirely his fault. The Labour philosophy is full of contradictions and holes. On the one hand, Corbyn and Labour claim to represent the worker and the poor. But Corbyn and his party also subscribe to cultural Marxist and cosmopolitan ideas that advocate immigration, diversity, identitarian politics and various measures of ‘correctness.’  One cannot support the worker while simultaneously advocating immigration that puts local jobs at risk.

In the aftermath of Brexit, Farage talked directly to British workers about a new future and the prospects for renewal of manufacturing and housing. At the same time, Corbyn was holding forth in support of refugees and against racism. Important topics; but not immediately relevant to those out of work.

The next question is why this contradiction is embedded in Labour and Left politics. The Labour Party is:

1. dominated by Jewish cosmopolitan ideology; and

2. funded by Jewish oligarchs.

The Jewish Left is pro immigration, pro identitarian politics, pro LGBT and so on. Jews realize that when things turn sour, it is the working class that turns against the Jews. This causes them to feel threatened by a cohesive working class. They prefer the working class to be broken into an endless number of different sectarian and identity groups. Jews would prefer society to be seen as a manifold of tribes and synagogues. That way the Jews are just one tribe amongst many. It is the Jewish Left that taught us that ‘the personal is political.’ These are the same people that trained us to talk ‘as a’: ‘as a black,’ ‘as a Muslim,’ ‘as a gay, ‘as a Jew’ and so on.   They have succeeded in dividing us.

Farage offered the Brits an opportunity to re-unite and think once again as Brits. At least 52% of the Brits bought into his call. His support included the vast majority of nonurban Brits who were apparently impervious to the Labour party’s contradictory position.

Alimuddin Usmani: Bernard-Henry Lévy labeled Brexit a strange defeat. He wrote that Brexit was a victory not of the people but of populism. 

How would you respond to him?

 To read BHL on Brexit click here

Gilad Atzmon: BHL’s post Brexit rant provides a window into Jewish fear and we should thank him for his willingness to share it with us.

To BHL true democracy, patriotism, nationalism, a united working class, manufacturing, coherence and truth are all symptoms of the Goyim’s resistance and must be suppressed.

BHL’s new evil Goyim are: Donald Trump, Putin and Nigel Farage whom he has now formally united with the Le Pens as the Hitlers of our time.

BHL’s rant attempts to conceal the fact that the Brits who oppose the EU are expressing frustration with mammonism.

Mammonism is a type of capitalism that is driven by financial transactions such as trade, banking and stock exchanges instead of by manufacturing. It is the exploitive capitalist agenda manipulated by the large financial institutions like Goldman Sachs and the financial speculators like Soros.

Brexit was effectively a vote against mammonism, against the banksters in the City and the global economy that left the worker with no prospect of a future. But the Brits who voted leave will probably not achieve what they intended. Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Liam Fox who led the leave campaign are themselves servants of the Jewish Lobby and the global mammonites. Brexit was an attempt to divert examination from the City and its oligarchs and focus blame on Brussels. BHL is working hard to prolong this concealment project. He is suffocating us with his shallow liberal ideas and empty jargon and hoping to turn the goyim against themselves.

BHL, the pro war Zionist neocon who bears direct responsibility for the destruction of the lives of millions of Muslims, doesn’t like popular movements such as the Italian 5 Star or Podemos in Spain. He wants to keep the Goyim in the dark and let Soros’ ‘Open Society Institute’ fund their fake opposition.

“It is the victory of the mob of Fritz Lang’s Metropolis,” BHL writes. By ‘mob’ the Jewish ‘philosopher’ means hard working Goyim — people who transcend sectarian politics in a search for unity. BHL should be clever enough to understand that such a craving ‘to be one’ was the driving force behind the Scottish referendum and the leave victory for Brexit. The cultural Marxist divisive agenda seems to have backfired.

In his rant, BHL can’t hide his goy hatred. He claims that half of the Brits who voted to leave the EU are “wreckers and dimwitted leftists, … drunken skinheads and hooligans, … illiterate rebels and bull-headed neo-nationalists.” Not exactly a flattering image delivered by the Jerusalemite thinker.

It has been established that the Jewish so called ‘intelligentsia’ claims credit for the enlightenment. BHL repeatedly follows that pattern. He claims to preach enlightenment values. In truth, Jewish thinkers contributed very little, if anything, to the enlightenment. Spinoza, the only Jew considered to be a prominent enlightening figure was excommunicated by his fellow Jews for being too enlightened. The Jewish so-called enlightenment (Haskalah) didn’t leave a single universal text. It basically taught Jews how to mimic the Goyim in the street while remaining Jews in their dwellings (be a Jew in your tent and a man on the street.)

If the enlightenment was actually the anthropocentric shift that led to the construction of popular individualism and is responsible for the birth of mass greed and consumerism, one would expect a ‘philosopher’ to grasp the growing disillusion with this endeavor. But BHL is not really a philosopher; he is a ‘Jewish philosopher.’ He specializes in populist pseudo intellectual harangue made up of an arbitrary collection of sound bites. Rather than producing enlightening content, BHL produces jargon. No one exhibits better than BHL that distinct dichotomy between Jerusalem and Athens. They are like oil and water. They can never mix. Accordingly a Jewish philosopher could be seen as a contradiction in terms. And indeed, those very few Jews who produced philosophy with universal values (Christ, Spinoza, Weininger and just a few others) are those who ended up in open dissent with their tribe.

Alimuddin Usmani: Alain Minc, French political advisor and author, born to a family of Jewish immigrants from Poland, wrote that Brexit is the victory of poorly educated people against well-educated people.

 What is your opinion?

Gilad Atzmon: It is true that there was a demographic, socioeconomic, age and education split between the remain and leave supporters. In general, the rich voted to remain and the poor wanted to leave.  The same was said about young and old. Some statistics point to an educational difference between the two sides. It is understandable that people who are less educated and likely to be limited to manual work would be the first to be affected by the collapse of manufacturing. It would be they who may see Brussels and the global economy as their enemy.

But here is the problem. Even if our society is partitioned by a cognitive barrier, the role of the ethical being is to care for the less able and less educated. Our duty is to make sure that all of us can earn a living and have a roof above our heads. I cannot see Labour and Corbyn with their Guardian supporters and Jewish funders leading such a move. In fact they didn’t. The Tories appear not to be aware that there is a problem.

Nigel Farage has unleashed a demon in Britain. But the movement extends beyond Britain or even Europe. The popularity of Trump, Sanders, NF and E&R (France) suggest that we are witnessing a global awareness of mammonism.

I also want to mention that the impression that all ‘leave’ supporters are less developed or educated is condescending and delusional. The Brexit debate revealed that some of the leave advocates were amongst the most sophisticated thinkers around. Many of them see the EU as a tool of the oligarchy and they are correct. They see leaving the EU as just the first step. The battle against mammonism is the big war ahead.

Alimuddin Usmani: An article published in Mondoweiss suggests that Israel should be deeply disturbed by the Brexit vote.

 David Cameron and Tony Blair, true friends of Israel, have been shaken by Brexit. Do you think that Brexit could harm Israeli interests?

Gilad Atzmon: Not in the short run. The leading Brexiters are prominent British sabbos goyim. Fox, Gove and Johnson are servants of the Jewish lobby. However, in the long run Israel and Jews should be very worried. The Brexit is a clear sign of mammonism fatigue. When the Brits and the French and the Greeks and the Americans identify that their destruction is connected to Goldman Sachs, Soros and the Jewish Lobby we will see developments that could lead to global aggression on a catastrophic scale. We had been there more than once. I would have loved to avoid it if it had been possible.



The Weekly Sabbos Goy Award Goes to Michael Gove (must watch)

March 30, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

The Zio-con Who Bought Disaster to Libya is Doing it Again

March 25, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon


By Gilad Atzmon

Bernard-Henri Lévy (BHL), the ultra Zionist who declared that ‘as a Jew’ he liberated Libya, is again campaigning for more immoral interventionist wars. He insists that the current terror in Europe comes from Syria and Iraq. His solution- let’s drop more bombs on Muslim and Arab cities- as if we haven’t been doing just that for decades.  I would expect nothing less from a Hasbra merchant, but why does the BBC feature such a clumsy Zio-con, one who is barely able to articulate an idea?

The Jewish so-called ‘philosopher’ tells lies on camera. He argues that the West had washed its hands of Syria’s uprising and didn’t want to intervene. Is that true?  In fact, throughout the war we have identified precisely those militias and the rebels that were working with Israel and the West.

Despite the obvious fact, widely accepted by Western analysts, that Asad and Iran hold the key to stability in the region, BHL continues to campaign against Bashar Assad.

Like his brethren Zionists, BHL also insists upon imposing a false demarcation between the ‘kosher Muslims’ and the ‘bad ones.’  In support, Levy recycles the false Zionist dichotomy between ‘Islam’ and ‘Islamism.’ But there is no such dichotomy. As in Judaism, in Islam there is no separation between the civil and the religious. Yet unlike the Jews, in Islam there is no such thing as a secular Muslim. Jews often drop God but retain their Jewish identity. When a Muslim stops believing in Allah, he or she stops being a Muslim. Thus the delusional dichotomy between Islam and Islamism is nothing but a Jewish projection–an attempt to Zionise the Muslim.

BHL reckons that Europe is dying.  If he is right, he can blame himself and Jewish lobbies that pushed us into so many criminal wars in devastating succession. But I believe that BHL is wrong; Europe will emerge from the present crisis in a stronger position. It will learn to identify its true roots in Athens and will drift away from Jerusalem and the destructive influence exerted by Zionist politics, such as BHL, Lord Cashpoint Levy, LFI, CFI and The Crif.

A Battle With No Front

November 14, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

Yesterday morning, the news was broadcast of extensive ‘heroic’ allied drone attacks in Iraq and Syria in support of the battle for Sinjar. We also learned about the assassination of Jihadi John. We were told some revenge might be on the way.  As promised, last night Paris was bathing in blood.

Welcome to World War III – a global conflict with unlimited battlefronts. We, as people of the world, are all caught in the middle in this disaster. We see that our universe is crumbling, we want peace, yet we don’t even know who the enemy is.

For some of us, this recent escalation is not a surprising development. We have been writing about it for years. We have been scrutinising the disastrous impact of the matrix of Ziocon immoral interventionist lobbies that have been relentlessly advocating more and more conflicts.  The CRIF in Paris, CFI in London and AIPAC in Washington all push for escalation of the battle against Arabs and Muslims in accordance with the Israeli plan for a new Middle East.

We are forced to accept the fact that extremist Muslims are very upset and they can hit hard and in a very short time. Russia saw one of its planes falling out of the sky, killing more than two hundred innocent holiday makers. Paris has again suffered. We must ask, is it necessary? Do we have to live in fear from now on? Is peace an option?

The terror is a message that we have to understand. What is its message? ‘Leave us alone’ is what these homicidal terrorists are trying to tell us. Is that too complicated for the Western subject to take in?  ‘Live and let others be,’ is what this is about. The pragmatic implication is obvious. The West must immediately stop serving Israeli and global Zionist interests. We must cease all operations in Arabia and the Mid East. For that to happen, and for a chance for peace, opposition to global Zionism and Israeli lobbying is imperative.

Here is some practical advice; next time Bernard Henri Levy, David Aaronovitch or Alan Dershowitz attempt to sell a new conflict-pack in the name of ‘human rights,’ we should politely advise them that we have learned our lesson – no more wars for Zion. Then, peace may prevail.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian 


The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Gilad Atzmon explains the subversion of the pro-Palestine cause by the Jewish left

June 02, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

By John Friend

Editor’s noteGilad Atzmon, an internationally renowned musician, philosopher, and writer born in Israel, is currently on a speaking tour to promote his latest book entitled A to Zion: The Definitive Israeli Lexicon, as well as address the Jewish subversion of the pro-Palestinian movement. On Monday, May 11th, Atzmon spoke at a public library in San Diego County, an event I was able to attend. We had a nice conversation and I was able to ask him a question following his presentation.

What follows is a Q&A I conducted with Atzmon via email shortly after his speech in San Diego. I hope to continue this dialogue in the near future. There are many more questions I’d like to ask him.

JF: In your talk, you described Jewish leftists infiltrating and ultimately undermining the Palestinian Solidarity movement – why? What is their ultimate goal?

GA: In an interview a few years back, Philip Weiss, the chief editor of the Jewish pro-Palestinian website Mondoweiss, admitted to me in plain terms that, in his eyes, pro-Palestinian activism serves “Jewish self interests.”

Such a Jewish activity conveys a (misleading) image of Jewish political pluralism. It suggests that not all Jews are “bad,” Jewish politics can even be ethical and universal.

Evidently, Jewish liberals are angry with me for unveiling the deceit that is embedded in such an attitude. They have invested a great effort attempting to silence me, and for a good reason – I have produced some persuasive arguments suggesting that Jewish solidarity is not the solution, it is actually the core of the problem.

In fact, the Jewish Left is far more problematic and dangerous than hardcore right-wing Zionism. Zionism is a celebration of the Jewish “symptom,” so to speak. The so-called “anti” are set to deny the rest of us an access to the symptom.

If Jewish power is defined as the power to suppress the discussion on Jewish power, Mondoweiss, Jewish Voices for PeaceDemocracy Now!Noam Chomsky and others are there to pursue with that task day and night.

They crudely restrict the boundaries of the discourse by means of political correctness. Mondoweiss went as far as banning any criticism of Israel within the context of Jewishness. This duplicitous attempt to subvert the discourse worked for a while. However, not anymore, and I take some credit for it.

Together with other thinkers and commentators, I have been pointing at a controlled opposition apparatus that is committed solely to “Jewish self interests,” as Philip Weiss was either brave or foolish enough to admit back in 2011.

JF: How is the Palestinian Solidarity movement or pro-Palestine cause now framed in Jewish terms and related to overall Jewish interests?

GA: As I showed in my San Diego talk, while in the past it was the Palestinian right of return that defined the Palestinian cause in ethical, political and legal terms, the growing domination of liberal Jews within the movement diluted this elementary right. It was replaced by a tsunami of misleading and faulty terminology that was set to appease some diaspora Jews and whatever is left of the Israeli Left. All of that was done at the expense of the Palestinians.

While the right of return located the Palestinian plight within historical, political, legal and moral context, the newly imposed terminology i.e., “End of Occupation”, “Colonialism”, “Apartheid”, and even the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement (post-2010), is legitimizing the Jewish state within pre-1967 borders. It dismisses the refugees, Gaza, and the Palestinian diaspora’s plight entirely.

It instead engages only with issues that are relevant to the West Bank, and why? Because the West Bank is subject of an internal Jewish debate. While the vast majority of world Jewry sees the West Bank as an integral part of greater Eretz Yisrael, a few liberal Jews in Manhattan insist that Tel Aviv is the true fulfillment of the Zionist project. The meaning of it is tragic. Thanks to the growing domination of Jews within the Palestinian Solidarity movement, the entire movement has been reduced into a Jewish internal debate. This may explain why the solidarity movement has achieved nothing as far as Palestine is concerned. It was born to fail and it achieved its goal.

In short, the Palestinian Solidarity movement is now a Jewish movement devoted to solidarity with the Jews. This could have been an amusing development unless there was a tragedy of another people involved.

JF: Can you comment on how the Palestinian Solidarity movement has become part of the larger overall social justice movement (LGBT rights, immigrant rights, feminism, etc.) in recent years?

GA: The Palestinian Solidarity movement becoming a part of a large social justice movement could have been a great and welcome development. Yet, one may wonder, is the breaking of society into identity politics sectors or factions such a great development? Obviously not.

In the last six decades the working people have been plundered repeatedly. The people who used to be called the working class are now the workless class, and many of them are underclass by now. But why?

Unlike the (imaginary) “old good labor-oriented Left” that promised to unite us all against capital and the Empire, the neo-Marxists and the Frankfurt Yeshiva enthusiasts invested a huge effort breaking the cohesiveness of the working people and Western society in general.

Instead of bringing people together, which was the old Left ideal, we are now split into tribal sectors. We are transformed into a matrix of a manifold of Jew-like tribal groupings defined largely by biology (color, gender, sexual preferences, race, etc). However, it is hardly surprising that Jewish identity merchants are way better than anyone else in being Jews. Jews have been practicing Jewish tribal survival strategies (identity politics and ethnocentrism) for 3000 years. This form of tribal politics is pretty new to gentiles and this may explain why identity politics has failed those who were lame enough to follow it in the first place.

We are dealing here with a multiplicity of impotent, marginal identity campaigns that are paralyzed by a strong sense of victimhood. The feminists are oppressed by masculinity, the Black is intimidated by the White, the gay is chased by the homophobe, the Muslims and their Islamophobes, and now the Palestinians also have the Zionists. We are dealing with a binary dichotomy between an imaginary and evasive “oppressor” and a concrete and lucid “victim”.

But here is the problem: those who indulge in a victimhood narrative end up in a state of paralysis – they learn to blame others yet vindicate themselves. Those who succumb to victimhood never look in the mirror; they never take responsibility for their fate.

For more than a while we have been witnessing a few Western Palestinians and Jewish liberals spreading hollow and misleading terminology that has removed the conflict from Palestine and their resistance; colonialism, apartheid, BDS –  everything but building Palestinian rockets or military defiance. This development obviously served the Jewish state. Instead of fighting Palestinian freedom fighters, the conflict was reduced into a meaningless exchange between two Jewish positions.

Though some Western Palestinians and NGOs joined this well-funded corrosive liberal Jewish project, Hamas didn’t fall into this trap. IDF infantry units were minced in Gaza last summer. They were met with fierce Palestinian resistance. While Chomsky debated Dershowitz on some questions to do with “the future of Palestine,” young Palestinians were preparing for battle. While the liberal Zionist George Soros’s Open Society funded a BDS LGBT tour in America, young Hamas engineers were digging tunnels and building rockets in Gaza. I am convinced that Palestinian Muslim leaders in Gaza grasped at a certain stage that the struggle for Palestinian queer politics may not be the definitive path toward Palestinian liberation.

False Flag in Kramatorsk

The Saker

 As always before any important negotiation, the US backed junta has executed yet another false flag, this time by firing at the city of Kramatorsk.  For all the details, please click here for a full analysis in Russian and here for a machine translated version of the same article.  The bottom line is this: the missile strike came from a location to the southwest of Kramatorsk, at least 35 miles away from the closets Novorussian positions.
To add “moral credibility” to this latest false flag, Poroshenko invited the French pseudo-philosopher but Ueber-Zionist warmonger Bernard Henri Levi (aka BHL) to inspect the results for himself.  Good move, but to add absolutely unimpugnable moral authority, Poroshenko should have also invited Elie Wiesel too.

Poroshenko and BHL – but where is Elie Wiesel?

Maybe next time?

The Saker

Donetsk PM: Ukraine run by ‘miserable’ Jews

%d bloggers like this: