Category Archives: English

UPDATED (11/28/022): The Curse of Ham: Pious Political Correctness Perverts The Hebrew Testament

Ancient History, Argument, Christianity, English, Hebrew Testament, Religion

If you are reading translations of the Tanach (acronym in Hebrew for all books of the Hebrew Bible: Pentateuch or Torah, Prophets and Writings)—you’re likely reading a lot of porcelainized nonsense

Funny thing how Christian commentary “changes” what my Hebrew Bible says, plain and simple. (I am sure politically correct, Americanized rabbis will join in this textual finessing.)

See, not only can I read Biblical Hebrew perfectly well—I’m looking at the tract now—but my Israeli teachers decades ago confirmed the commentary that claims Ham and descendants were cursed.

Ham did something unspeakable to his father, Noah. Noah, cursed him and descendants.

“And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.”

But not according to King James commentary, which is still better than most. Accordingly, the biblical author didn’t know what he was saying. Ham’s descendants were never cursed in the Hebrew Bible.

Yeah they were. It says so in Genesis 9:24.

That’s why I say: If you are reading translations of the Tanach (acronym in Hebrew for all books of the Hebrew Bible: Pentateuch or Torah, Prophets and Writings)—you’re likely reading a lot of porcelainized nonsense.

UPDATED (11/28/022): Interesting thread on LinkedIn.

ME: The biblical tract doesn’t say today’s blacks originated in Ham. And I, of course, claimed nothing of the sort. I said quite clearly that Ham and descendants were cursed in the Hebrew Bible, and pious scripture should not develop creative ways of pretending they were not.
I don’t know who Ham begot. I do know that his excuse-making defenders say he begot the greatest civilization ever. ? Why, of course. Next they’ll claim ancient Egyptians were really Africans. Wait a sec, they have already.
Ask Mary Lefkowitz, Greek classicist, author of “Not Out Of Africa: How “Afrocentrism” Became An Excuse To Teach Myth As History.”

 AND:

Yes, let us demonize non-aggressor Noah for objecting to his abuse. I have not disputed your point. I only questioned the hubbub of white-noise commentary around what seems to be straightforward biblical text.

FRED REED: The Immigrant Thing: Latinos (Mostly), the Racial Right, and Wokismo

Conservatism, Donald Trump, English, IMMIGRATION, Latin American, Literature, Race

Young Mexican women are often horribly pretty and, when speaking unaccented American English, are exotic as potatoes. Same-same Asians. Love it or hate it, this battle is over. (Fred’s pretty doctor is pictured below, origin ‘east of the Suez’)

By Fred Reed

Startlingly, at least in today’s political climate, we will begin with the facts of immigration: America is eighteen percent Latino and climbing, six percent Asian and climbing. (Blacks, thirteen percent, cannot reasonably be called immigrants.) Given that over half of sub-eighteen children are not white, it is mathematically inevitable that before long most Americans will not be white. One may think this good or bad as one chooses. It will happen anyway.

Here we come to the fractured politics of the Great Squirrel Cage North of Mexico. On one hand we have vaguely defined groups who collectively might be called the Racial Right. They oppose immigration and immigrants, unless they are white, and say things like “Keep America American,” meaning what they regard as American. Their influence is limited because (a) immigrants, especially Latinos, have too many votes to be ignored and their numbers grow (b). America depends too heavily on its immigrants, Latinos in agriculture, construction, and service industries, East Asians and Indians in high-tech, and (c) the immigrants just aren’t behaving badly enough to engender a salubrious hostility. Not enough whites are upset enough to favor anything dramatic.

Yet coming from what passes for the Left in America is alarm over White Supremacists, White Nationalists, the Dissident Right and suchlike horrors, probably involving, oh God, Trump supporters and threatening racial Armageddon. Boredom can be intense in the bleak suburbs of Washington and one takes one’s excitement where one finds it. Actually the Racial Right is little more than a pastime without practical import. Immigrants are assimilating unnoticed and this will continue. No amount of fizzing by nativists will change this. Further, the mainline White Nationalists, as distinct from disturbed men playing with guns in the woods of Idaho, are not dangerous. For the most part they are not even bad people. This, I know, will disappoint the pseudo-Left. Well, you can’t have everything. That’s just how life is.

For what it’s worth, years ago In Washington, DC, I spoke to a convention of American Renaissance, a major White Nationalist group, who wanted to know about Mexico. Outside a clutch of yahoos and dingalings picketed against the fascist nightmare within. I entered with trepidation. As it turned out, the center of gravity of this unholy sabbath  were worried white dweebs in late middle age, concerned about the direction in which immigration was taking their country. Agree with them or not, Nazis they weren’t. They, I think, are the backbone of anti-immigrant forces, not the KKK.

The politics of tortillaphobia can be confusing. In those days one of the Racial Right’s objections to Latinos was that they were not assimilable. Now the objection is that they are. When you peeled back the stated aims, their desire was and is to maintain the genetic purity of the white race. In today’s Woke climate, this idea is shocking, appalling, unacceptable and so on and so forth, though of course most ethnic groups don’t like to see their women marrying out. Anyway, preventing intermarriage—nativists prefer the slightly obscene sounding “miscegenation”—is a lost cause. Young Mexican women are often horribly pretty and, when speaking unaccented American English, are exotic as potatoes. Same-same Asians. Love it or hate it, this battle is over.

It comes down to this:  If you want to promote the domestic tranquility, you favor assimilation. If you want to preserve the genetic purity of whites, you want the worst possible relations between whites and everybody else. No compromise is possible. It’s assimilation or purity, but not both. In fact, whether we want it or not, it is going to be assimilation.

In the political climate of today, nativism seems more a profound disgruntlement than anything practical. Its stated aims are either impossible or would be largely ineffective. For example, closing the border may be possible in a few years, or may not, but the sixty or seventy million Latinos north of the border are, well, north of the border. Can anyone within shouting distance of his right mind believe America is going to deport millions? And anyone who thinks America is going to break into three racially defined countries needs to stop smoking that Drano.

Curiously, assimilation will be as disastrous for the woke as for the racialists, though they may not be aware of it. The woke want to see themselves as champions of oppressed People of Color (POCs) and for this to work they need a constant supply of such. The problem is that these wretched people won’t stay oppressed. Most flavors of peoples of color have already turned traitor and become prosperous and even sometimes Republican. The Chinese, Koreans, Indians, Japanese and so on are not all programmers at Google or owners of start-ups in Silicon Valley, but close. They have jumped ship, so to speak, and are no longer fit object of the adolescent maternal instincts of the Woke. So the Woke never mention them. Successful immigrants are an embarrassment to them.

That leaves Latinos as the only suitable immigrant objects of Woke solidarity with the oppressed. Wokesters consequently grasp at Hispanics and lump them in with blacks, with whom Latinos have little in common, as maltreated POCs. By so doing, and carefully ignoring nonconforming people of color such as the Chinese, they can maintain their vision of wicked white colonialists and slave-owner wannabes brutalizing heartwarming nonwhites.

But now the damned Latinos are assimilating! Yes, leaving the plantation, the ungrateful wretches. And marrying Anglos and speaking native English and getting white-collar jobs and otherwise engaging in class treason. And if you ask a statistically valid number of them what is important, they will say things like jobs, the economy, medical care, schooling for the kids, conservative morality, and strong police forces. They don’t see any advantage in being oppressed. Thus assimilation and prosperity among Latinos threaten the pseudo-Left’s hold on its largest client group.

Problems of nomenclature can arise. I confess that I was at first puzzled when reading of BIPOCs. What were these, I wondered? If there were BIPOCs, were there monoPOCs? Would little short POCs be smallPOCS? Was there a vaccine? Should India’s population be measured in gigaPOCs? These were deep waters. (BIPOCs turned out to be black, indigenous people of color, I think.)

Much of Racial Right thought is backward-looking conservative romanticism doused liberally with sheer fantasy. They long for an all-white America that hasn’t existed since 1619, when their revered ancestors imported black slaves about whose progeny they now complain mightily. They say for example that America would be much happier if all white. This is true but irrelevant since it isn’t.  For the record, an all-white America would not have had slavery, perhaps the Civil War, Jim Crow, racism, burning cities, race riots, horrendous rates of crime otherwise unknown in the developed world, affirmative action, or Floyd. And if wishes were horses….

The Racial Right’s opposition is equally deep in fantasy. While the Woke offer themselves as being of the Left, they in fact are neither Leftist nor liberal, but practitioners of an intense class snobbery. The Left historically was the party of the working man. This was true of Marx. (“Workers of the world, unite.”) There was Saul Alinsky in the dismal stockyards of Chicago and authors like Upton Sinclair (The Jungle) and John Steinbeck (East of Eden, Of Mice and Men, Cannery Row supporting the white working class.) The pseudo-Left of today scorns working men, who they label Deplorables. They consist heavily of well-off, highly educated coastal elites who loathe working stiffs whom, they suspect, voted for Trump.  They love blacks with an almost humid intensity but wouldn’t go near South Chicago in an armored bathysphere and their kids go to pricey private schools. The traditional Left would detest them.

The racialists are hardly less hypocritical. They proclaim their love of America, yet loathe the thirteen percent who are black, eighteen percent Latino, six percent Asian, two percent Jewish, and the (wild guess) fifty percent who are Democrats. They sound suspicious of Catholics and of South and East Europeans, though this may be a holdover from the Nativist Revival of the Twenties. But they love America, or at least enough of it to fill a small gymnasium.

A belief crucial to the sense of wellbeing and contentment among the pseudo-Left is that America is sordidly and irrevocably racist. Is it? At least sixty million Latinos live in America, most of them citizens, with virtually no race riots or, in most places, much interest. Inattention is the highest form of acceptance. California has more Mexicans than whites, so would you not expect trouble there if there were going to be trouble? Nada. There is no Knockout Game among Latinos. They don’t push Asian women in front of subway trains. Nor are whites lynching browns, or doing much of anything about them.

Americans seem more opposed to immigration than to immigrants. They want to close the border but not to drag the third-grade children of illegal immigrants from school rooms and leave them on the sidewalks. Only far out on the Right Wing, where the feathers run out and giddy space begins, do we hear calls for massive deportation. Given the enormous scale of the influx, the paucity of animosity is remarkable.

The Racial Right suffers an ongoing erosion by events. When I left America for Mexico twenty years ago, there was across Wilson Boulevard in the Virginia suburbs of Washington a restaurant called the Asia Café. The waitresses were young Asian women, Malays, Viets, that sort of thing, and the manager was a Japanese woman. I asked one what she did during the day. Oh, she said, she was studying computer security at a local university. Another had a similar answer, which I have forgotten. Up the street was a Vietnamese restaurant that was engaging in the Asian practice of keeping labor costs down by employing the daughters as waitresses. After years of dining there it occurred to me to ask the same question. One replied that she was a wide-area network engineer. The other said that she had gotten a Master’s in biochemistry but you couldn’t make money that way so she was in dental school.

An internet friend once offered to arrange an appointment for me with a high-end ophthalmologist. This turned out to be Yassine Daoud, Lebanese and a star surgeon at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore. A former street urchin in Beirut (really), he got to Hopkins by a combination of brains, luck, and Harvard med. On another occasion I had an appointment at EDOW, Eye Doctors of Washington. The doctor was Deepika Shah, by a brown cast and name or origins somewhere east of Suez. University of Virginia undergrad, Penn for med school, impressive resumé. Also pretty. (Look, I’m a guy. Deal with it.) Her insurance woman was named Martinez.

(Very Pretty Doctor)

On the same trip the assistant manager and a teller at my bank were Mexicans, perfect but slightly accented English. Later, in Austin, the recommended ophthalmologist was Annie Chan, Chinese, and her support staff were two Mexican women. Nobody seemed outraged by this. In practice Americans seem to accept anyone who speaks English, obeys the laws, behaves civilly, and has a job.

Here it is worth noting that the objections of the Racial Right to immigrants are rhetorical. Websites that verge on being official voices of White Nationalism, notably American Renaissance and Vdare, have not the slightest whiff of calls to violence. They are not Nazis, do not advocate actually doing anything, such as boycotting immigrant businesses. One reads in the media of racist attacks on Asians. These are committed by blacks, not White Supremacists or Latinos. Again, regarding immigrants, the Racial Right seems more in the nature of a hobby than an onrushing wave of, well, anything.

This information will arouse despondency in the woke for whom alarm at imagined brown-shirted hordes seems also to be a hobby. Nativists themselves may be mellowing a bit regarding immigrants. For long years, and still to some extent. The racialist, Republicans all, wrote that Latinos were criminal, carried thirteenth-century diseases, couldn’t read, didn’t speak English, were infested by lice and bedbugs, and were not assimilable. They then wondered why Latinos didn’t vote Republican. Today one hears less of it, vehemence being more directed at blacks and their crime.

The future? Sez I, the country will muddle along as it now muddles, boringly. Blacks are a different question, but, regarding immigrants, there just isn’t enough racism to satisfy either the Woke or the Racial Right.  You can’t have everything.

Subscribe/Unsubscribe

Comments/Archive

Buy Fred’s Books! Solidly Built. You can squash bugs with them.

******************************************

FRED REED describes himself as [previously] a “Washington police reporter, former Washington editor for Harper’s and staff writer for Soldier of Fortune magazine, Marine combat vet from Viet Nam, and former long-haul hitchhiker, part-time sociopath, who once lived in Arlington, Virginia, across the Potomac River from the Yankee Capital.”
His essays “on the collapse of America” Mr. Reed calls “wildly funny, sometimes wacky, always provocative.”
“Fred is the Hunter Thompson of the right,” seconds Thomas E. Ricks in Foreign Policy magazine. His  commentary is “well-written, pungent political incorrectness mixed with smart military commentary and libertarian impulses, topped off with a splash of Third World sunshine and tequila.”

FRED’S BOOKS ARE ON AMAZON, HERE

FRED’S ARTICLES ARCHIVE

Killer Kink

Hardboiled is back! (The exclamation point is to arouse wild enthusiasm in the reader, a boiling literary lust.) Gritty crime fiction by longtime police reporter for the Washington Times, who knows the police from nine years of riding with them. Guaranteed free of white wine and cheese, sensitivity, or social justice.

 

The Illiterati Strikes: Stupid, Slothful And Nasty

America, Culture, Education, English, Etiquette, Ilana Mercer, Intelligence

The letters-to-the-editor came quick and steady. Some were repulsively nasty. None of the authors could read, reason or write. All had the attention span and concentration powers of a gnat (with apologies to the gnat community).

For some reason, the image conjured by the bare-fanged fury of one letter writer is of Lisa Simpson, transformed into a mountain of immobile, doughy flesh, in “Mama’s Watching Her Stories.

Unable to read or comprehend a paragraph, the writer, Annemarie, launched into a sneering screed:

If you haven’t yet realized your egregious error—if only one is present—William is the elder grandson of Elizabeth, married to Kate, who together have three children. Harry is married to Megan Markel and they have two children. I couldn’t even finish your commentary as I began questioning other statements you made as I read. Sorry Ileana, but your credibility is shot with me: in my estimation you now rank right up there (or should I say ‘down there’)with the rest of the “woke” media—you have list all credibility with me. I am extremely disappointed that the editors at WND allowed this column to get into print because your dismal transposition reflected badly on them as well.

My reply about the words (in “Bar Meghan Markle From The Great Lady’s Funeral“), which the dolt was unable to read and comprehend:

It’s sad that you’d rather shoot your mouth off nastily, believing you are being clever, than read with care.

Here is the correct excerpt, without your imagined contortions. You appear unable to deal with, 1. A long sentence. 2. An em-dash in the middle of it. 3. Capital “B”.

Omit the em-dash— it’s like a clause—and you’ll get the “correct answer.”

Next time, read, and re-read before dashing off a hateful note to someone who toils thankless for liberty with her capable WND editor. I’ve separated the paragraph into sentences to make it easier for you.

William worked as an RAF search and rescue helicopter pilot.

Before marrying that dolt from TinseltownMeghan Markle, who imagined she was a match for the queen of England—young Prince Harry had served in Afghanistan, and wore his Afghanistan Campaign medals on his brother’s wedding day. …

To my surprise, there were more such letters.

And, Boobus Americanus is headed for the voting booths.

An aphorism from one of Oscar Wilde’s plays came to mind. I paraphrase: “She thought that because he was stupid he’d be kindly, when kindliness requires imagination and intelligence.”

Stupid is usually mean.

* Screen picture credit @ Reddit.

NEW COLUMN: Bar Meghan Markle From The Great Lady’s Funeral

Britain, Conservatism, Constitution, Democracy, English, Globalism, Nationalism, Nationhood, South-Africa

NEW COLUMN is “Bar Meghan Markle From The Great Lady’s Funeral.” It’s a feature on WND, Unz Review, and The New American.

It’s no secret I favor monarchy over mob rule, namely democracy aka mobocracy.

“From pundits on our side of the pond, however, the monarchy regularly draws nasty barbs. Trashing the British monarchy appears to be their way of asserting American exceptionalism. I wager that were the conservative, periwigged Englishmen who founded America to pounce back on to the ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’ TV set—the only place they’d be welcomed, given their ‘Ultra MAGA’ bent—the founders, too, would favor the monarchy over the current American mobocracy.”

… consider the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and the tawdry, quintessentially American saga they had inflicted on the queen. That the British monarchy stands for the last vestiges of ancient English tradition is not in dispute. But what do the Americanized Harry Windsor, formerly known as Prince Harry, and Meghan Markle represent? …

MORE on WND, Unz Review, and The New American.

A different measure of her Majesty was taken by British paleolibertarian and friend Sean Gabb. In 2012, Dr. Gabb dubbed Elizabeth II “Elizabeth the Useless.”

Brilliant piece, facts all new to me in “Sixty Years a Rubber Stamp” By Sean Gabb:

“The Queen has not sustained our national identity. … she has allowed many people to overlook the structures of absolute and unaccountable power that have grown up during her reign. She has fronted a revolution to dispossess us of our country and of our rights within it.”

“The Queen should have resisted the Offensive Weapons Bill and the Firearms Bill, that effectively abolished our right to keep and bear arms for defence. She should have resisted the Bills that abolished most civil juries and that allowed majority verdicts in criminal trials.”

“She should have resisted the numerous private agreements that made our country into an American satrapy. She should have insisted, every time she met her Prime Minister, on keeping the spirit of our old Constitution. There have been many times since 1972 when she should have acted. …”

“… she has acted only twice in my lifetime to force changes of policy. In 1979, she bullied Margaret Thatcher to go back on her election promise not to hand Rhodesia over to a bunch of black Marxists. In 1987, she bullied Thatcher again to … sanction South Africa. … MORE.

What are we to expect from Charles III?

Nothing, says Dr. Gabb, today.

He is old and stupid and possibly malevolent. Nor do I expect anything of William V, assuming he is ever allowed to succeed. George V was unfortunate in his progeny, and its quality has been dropping ever since. If all else had been sound, monarchs of low intellectual quality might not have been a problem – though I suspect it would always have had damaging effects given that our constitution is monarchical and in need of some ability at the top. But they were stupid at a time when intelligent monarchs were an essential safeguard against a political class that, since about 1940, has never risen above the worthless.

* Screen pic image via Sean Gabb.