Archives‎ > ‎

Final Dossier: Weinstein, Jews in Hollywood and American Culture (Part 1)

This is probably the best dossier you will find on Jewish Hollywood. I aim to provide solid, verifiable information, sufficient to stand up to the bullies, just as Harvey Weinstein's victims stood up to him - in the end.
- Peter Myer

Here are the key links:

You may use or forward any of my material, provided that you acknowledge my role as investigator.

(1) Harvey Weinstein at Algemeiner dinner: ‘I Am an Israeli in My Heart and Mind’

(2) Youtube video of Weinstein’s remarks

(3) The Fall of Harvey Weinstein is a major event in the Culture War

(4) Jews Run Hollywood: So What? - Moment Magazine, August 1996, front cover

(5) Is Hollywood Run by Jews? You bet! - by Joel Stein, LA Times, December 19, 2008

(6) Why Hot, WASPy Chicks Love Jews, by Joel Stein (LA Times)

(7) Harvey Weinstein’s Catholic-Bashing Films

(8) France to strip Weinstein of the Legion of Honor award

(9) Chelsea Clinton evades Reporters asking whether Clinton Foundation will return Harvey Weinstein’s Donations

(10) Rose McGowan: Hollywood Blacklisted me because I got raped, because I said something

(11) Marilyn Munroe and the Jewish men who ran Hollywood - sexually fixated on the Shiksa

(12) Rabbi Dresner blames 'the Hollywood crowd' for Destruction of the Traditional Family - E. Michael Jones

(13 -20 are in Part 2)


(1) Harvey Weinstein at Algemeiner dinner: ‘I Am an Israeli in My Heart and Mind’

Algemeiner bills itself as "the fastest growing Jewish newspaper in America".

SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 1:06 PM

Oscar-Winning Producer Harvey Weinstein at Algemeiner Gala: ‘I Am Israeli in My Heart and Mind’

Oscar-winning film producer Harvey Weinstein expressed his deep love and appreciation for the Jewish state on Monday, saying, “I am an Israeli in my heart and mind.”

Speaking on the red carpet at The Algemeiner‘s fourth annual gala in New York City, Weinstein emphasized, “I love that country, I love what it stands for, I am proud to be Jewish.”

The Hollywood mogul recounted his appearance at The Algemeiner’s gala in 2013, when he presented Holocaust survivor and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Elie Wiesel with the “Warrior for Truth” award. Wiesel served as chairman of The Algemeiner’s Tribute Committee until his passing in 2016.

“This is one of the most influential presses we have, not only in [the] Jewish world, but all [the] world,” Weinstein observed.

He also spoke of his upcoming movie “Mila 18,” an adaptation of Leon Uris’ acclaimed novel on the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising.

“When people see ‘Mila 18,’ they can subtitle it ‘Jews with guns,’ because this is not about going into the night quietly,” Weinsteinsaid. “This is the birth of the modern Israelis, these were the guys in the ghetto who said we are not going to walk into the concentration camps and get herded like cattle. They said, we’re going to kill some Germans instead.”

(2) Youtube video of Weinstein’s remarks

{Best save this to your computer, before it's taken down. Save the link too - Peter M}

Q: Lastly, does Israel advocacy play any part in your life? Are you supporting it at all?

Weinstein: I'm an Israeli in my heart and mind. I love that country. I love what it stands for. I'm proud to be Jewish.

(3) The Fall of Harvey Weinstein is a major event in the Culture War - Peter Myers, October 16, 2017

The fall of Harvey Weinstein is a sequel to the fall of Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Both were powerful Jews at the top, who used lawyers to suppress evidence of their rapes and other sex crimes against women. Weinstein used "non-Disclosure clauses" in contracts to intimidate victims from speaking out.

For highlighting Harvey Weinstein's Jewishness, some people will call me 'anti-semitic'. But he trumpeted that Jewishness and his identification with Israel, despite having committed such crimes for decades. And Jewish media feted him, despite the rumors that circulated.

I have provided evidence (below) from Jewish sources, that Hollywood is run by Jews, and that they have been destroying traditional values and Christian America.

Weinstein made many anti-Catholic films. He dished it out in the name of Judaism; so the stigna will stick to Judaism too. It's up to Jews to reform their culture, as Rabbi Sam Dresner and Rabbi Daniel Lapin long urged.

Moment Magazine, which billed itself as "The Jewish Magazine for the '90s", ran a front cover saying Jews Run Hollywood: So What?

The LA Times of December 19, 2008 ran an article Is Hollywood Run by Jews? You bet! - by Joel Stein.

Photos of both originals are at

The LA Times one is still online - but WITH a CHANGED HEADLINE.

Weinstein's fall will be a turning point in the Culture War, because the New Left (Feminist, Gay Rights, Trans) claims the Moral High Ground in matters of sex and gender; and this is no longer tenable. The Catholic Church has long been a target, while Hollywood has been busy corrupting the youth. Now Hollywood is itself being exposed by the very Feminist movement it championed. The women are determined that this issue will not be buried; the media can no longer maintain silence about it; and Weinstein may only be the first of many to be outed.

Jews are not the only ones who can claim Victimhood.

France has taken steps to strip Weinstein of the Legion of Honor award; but the Simon Wisenthal Center has still not revoked the award it issued to Weinstein.


(4) Jews Run Hollywood: So What? - Moment Magazine, August 1996, front cover

see the original front cover at

or at

The Jewish Magazine for the '90s

August 1996/ AV 5756

"It makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most influential production executives at each of the major movie studios will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names."

Jews Run Hollywood – So What?

 May 25, 2016

“Jews Run Hollywood – So What?”

– is a brazen “shove it down your throat article”

Marlon Brando complained on the Larry King Live show on april 5th 1996 that, “Hollywood is run by Jews – it is owned by Jews!” He added that the Jews have slandered every other racial group, “but are ever so careful to insure that there is never any negative image of the Kike.”

For this Marlon Brando was labelled “anti-Semitic” and forced to apologize to the Jews running the Simon Wiesenthal Holocaust Tourist Center in Los Angeles.

Now organized Jewry has become so brazen and powerful that they are no longer making any secret of this fact!

Jews Run Hollywood – So What? The American Moment Magazine is subtitled, “The Jewish Magazine for the ’90s”. Its edition of Aug. 1996 carries the startling headline “Jews Run Hollywood – So What?” The author is the Jew Michael Medved who states:

“It makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most influential production executives at each of the major movie studios will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names.”

The article then describes how the Jew Michael Eisner, the Head of Walt Disney studios only hires “highly paid Jewish moguls” as producers such as Jeffrey Katzenberg, Michael Ovitz, Joe Roth (former head of 20th Century Fox). Medved emphazises the point that, “The famous Disney organization, which was founded by Walt Disney, a gentile Midwesterner who allegedly harboured anti-Semitic attitudes, now features Jewish personnel in nearly all its most powerful positions.”

Medved continues: “Men and women of Jewish background enjoy a vastly disproportionate – if not dominate – influence in Hollywood.” He adds that even studios which were bought out by the Japanese Sony Corp. and by the Australian Jew Rupert Murdoch, still had to hire, “a Yiddish team of long-time industry leaders in all the most powerful positions. When Mitsushita took over MCA-Universal, they did nothing to undermine the unquestioned authority of Universal’s legendary – and all-Jewish – management triad of Lew Wasserman, Sid Scheinberg and Tom Pollack.”

Medved further writes that most of today’s movie moguls graduated from Ivy League colleges, “where Jews are vastly over-represented – just as they are in Hollywood.” [...]

Medved says that such anti-Christian films as “The Last Temptation of Christ” by Lew Wasserman, “gives tactic approval to what most Americans consider as a damaging influence of the entertainment industry.”

Medved ends with this statement, which should be a warning to all non-Jews:

“The combined weight of so many Jews in one of America’s most lucrative and important industries gives the Jews of Hollywood a great deal of political power. They are a major source of money for Democratic candidates. The industry’s informal patriarch, MCA chairman Lew Wasserman, wields tremendous personal clout in state and national politics. So do Barbara Streisand, Norman Lear and others.”


(5) Is Hollywood Run by Jews? You bet! - by Joel Stein, LA Times, December 19, 2008

Is Hollywood Run by Jews? You bet!

By Joel Stein

LA Times, December 19, 2008

see it at

or at

{still online, but WITH A CHANGED HEADLINE) at}

I have never been so upset by a poll in my life. Only 22% of Americans now believe "the movie and television industries are pretty much run by Jews," down from nearly 50% in 1964. The Anti-Defamation League, which released the poll results last month, sees in these numbers a victory against stereotyping. Actually, it just shows how dumb America has gotten. Jews totally run Hollywood.

How deeply Jewish is Hollywood? When the studio chiefs took out a full-page ad in the Los Angeles Times a few weeks ago to demand that the Screen Actors Guild settle its contract, the open letter was signed by: News Corp. President Peter Chernin (Jewish), Paramount Pictures Chairman Brad Grey (Jewish), Walt Disney Co. Chief Executive Robert Iger (Jewish), Sony Pictures Chairman Michael Lynton (surprise, Dutch Jew), Warner Bros. Chairman Barry Meyer (Jewish), CBS Corp. Chief Executive Leslie Moonves (so Jewish his great uncle was the first prime minister of Israel), MGM Chairman Harry Sloan (Jewish) and NBC Universal Chief Executive Jeff Zucker (mega-Jewish). If either of the Weinstein brothers had signed, this group would have not only the power to shut down all film production but to form a minyan with enough Fiji water on hand to fill a mikvah.

The person they were yelling at in that ad was SAG President Alan Rosenberg (take a guess). The scathing rebuttal to the ad was written by entertainment super-agent Ari Emanuel (Jew with Israeli parents) on the Huffington Post, which is owned by Arianna Huffington (not Jewish and has never worked in Hollywood.)

The Jews are so dominant, I had to scour the trades to come up with six Gentiles in high positions at entertainment companies. When I called them to talk about their incredible advancement, five of them refused to talk to me, apparently out of fear of insulting Jews. The sixth, AMC President Charlie Collier, turned out to be Jewish.

As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood. Without us, you'd be flipping between "The 700 Club" and "Davey and Goliath" on TV all day.

So I've taken it upon myself to re-convince America that Jews run Hollywood by launching a public relations campaign, because that's what we do best. I'm weighing several slogans, including: "Hollywood: More Jewish than ever!"; "Hollywood: From the people who brought you the Bible"; and "Hollywood: If you enjoy TV and movies, then you probably like Jews after all."

I called ADL Chairman Abe Foxman, who was in Santiago, Chile, where, he told me to my dismay, he was not hunting Nazis. He dismissed my whole proposition, saying that the number of people who think Jews run Hollywood is still too high. The ADL poll, he pointed out, showed that 59% of Americans think Hollywood execs "do not share the religious and moral values of most Americans," and 43% think the entertainment industry is waging an organized campaign to "weaken the influence of religious values in this country."

That's a sinister canard, Foxman said. "It means they think Jews meet at Canter's Deli on Friday mornings to decide what's best for the Jews." Foxman's argument made me rethink: I have to eat at Canter's more often.

"That's a very dangerous phrase, 'Jews control Hollywood.' What is true is that there are a lot of Jews in Hollywood," he said. Instead of "control," Foxman would prefer people say that many executives in the industry "happen to be Jewish," as in "all eight major film studios are run by men who happen to be Jewish."

But Foxman said he is proud of the accomplishments of American Jews. "I think Jews are disproportionately represented in the creative industry. They're disproportionate as lawyers and probably medicine here as well," he said. He argues that this does not mean that Jews make pro-Jewish movies any more than they do pro-Jewish surgery. Though other countries, I've noticed, aren't so big on circumcision.

I appreciate Foxman's concerns. And maybe my life spent in a New Jersey-New York/Bay Area-L.A. pro-Semitic cocoon has left me naive. But I don't care if Americans think we're running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.


(6) Why Hot, WASPy Chicks Love Jews, by Joel Stein (LA Times)

Why Hot, WASPy Chicks Love Jews

by Joel Stein

no longer at,1,4621281.column

but is at

January 9, 2005

This is embarrassing to admit, but we thought you didn't like us. So while we Jews were controlling the media, we tried to avoid putting actual Jewish characters in front of you. Seinfield, sure. But we made George Costanza Italian. We gave Craig Kilborn a talk show.

But now that you've spent about $200 million to laugh at Ben Stiller's mega-Jewish parents dealing with his WASPy soon-to-be-in-laws in "Meet the Fockers," we feel comfortable showing you our big Jewish selves. Philosemetism, which is so new we had to invent a word for it, has led to a whole new genre: Jewsploitation.

In addition to "Fockers," there's the movie "The Hebrew Hammer," Heeb magazine, Jewcy clothing, Adam Sandler's "Hanukkah Song" and his animated film "Eight Crazy Nights," and an upcoming collection of bar mitzvah stories called "Bar Mitzvah Disco."

The fact that young Jews in Hollywood feel comfortable creating Jewy characters isn't surprising. That's what happens when you forget to stop scaring us. You let us into your country clubs, gave us your women and encouraged our most annoyingly self-righteous member to run for president. So now that we've assimilated to the point where we're completely the same as white people, we're trying to re-create a community by shoving our culture down your throats. The bizarre part is that the same masses who saw "The Passion of the Christ" are into it. [...]

And I love Jewsploitation. It's what we were doing already anyway. When you belong to a people who can completely pass as white, you have the luxury of exploiting your difference when it's to your advantage and hiding it when it's not. It's why we crafted this clever but adorably harmless image. We've infantilized ourselves. Because hot WASPy chicks love babies.


(7) Harvey Weinstein’s Catholic-Bashing Films

OCT. 14, 2017

A Litany of Harvey Weinstein’s Catholic-Bashing Films

Angelo Stagnaro

[...] while the polecatWeinstein abused women, he donated money to women’s causes because of his “undying respect” for them. And, throughout his best efforts are luring women to his casting couch, Weinstein was financing films that attacked and denigrated the Catholic Church, including such priceless cinematic gems as:

Priest (1995), a film which centers around a vampire-killing parody of the Church in which priests are depicted as misanthropic atheists.

The Butcher Boy (1998) is about a young boy who is molested by a priest in a reform school and is fascinated by delusional fantasies about a foul-mouthed Virgin Mary played by everyone’s favorite bigot, Sinéad O'Connor. Birds of a feather flock together.

Dogma (1999), a confusing pastiche of Catholic beliefs, pagan myths and atheist Black Legend slapped together about the end of the worldin which a descendant of Blessed Virgin Mary and St. Joseph who works in an abortion clinic.

40 Days and 40 Nights (2002) ridicules Catholics who remain celibate for Lent treating sacrifice and abstention as if it was feat of strength rather than a spiritual offering to God.

The Magdalene Sisters (2002) depicted lies about Irish nuns falsely portraying them as abusive toward young wayward women they had “enslaved” in their laundries. In reality, the Irish secular government, dumped these women with the nuns as their families had already disowned them. The nuns gave them food, board and spiritual guidance and showed them love saving these young women from having to prostitute themselves.

Bad Santa (2003) depicted a mall Santa who was a vulgar, drunken, suicidal, chain-smoking, sex-addicted thief. Some have drawn parallels between this mockery of this children’s icon and Weinstein himself.

Sin City (2005) which depicted a Catholic bishop who aides and abets a serial murderer and engages in cannibalism.

Black Christmas (2006) is a tiresome slasher film replete with gratuitous sex and foul language. Both Harvey and his brother Bob were remarkably hands-on with this film.

Philomena (2013) was another set of lies reminiscent of the Black Legend that insisted that “evil” nuns had kidnapped a woman’s child.Actually, Philomena Lee abandoned her out-of-wedlock son when she was a teenager. It was the actions of the nuns, who often run orphanages around the world and throughout the past two millennia, who gave the child to an American couple who adopted him. Weinstein lobbied theAcademy in the hope of getting an Oscar for Philomena. Thankfully, he failed. [...]

(8) France to strip Weinstein of the Legion of Honor award

Macron proposed to revoke Weinstein's Legion of Honor

Paris: France began the process of depriving Harvey Weinstein of the Order of the Legion of Honor, the highest civilian difference in France.

This was reported in the press service of President Emmanuel Macron.


(9) Chelsea Clinton evades Reporters asking whether Clinton Foundation will return Harvey Weinstein’s Donations


Chelsea Clinton evaded reporters outside of Northeastern University in Boston on Saturday asking whether the Clinton Foundation would return donations from alleged sex offender Harvey Weinstein.

The Daily Mail reports that the Clinton Foundation board member and former first daughter ran from reporters after a Clinton Global Initiative event asking if the Clinton Foundation would return $250,000 worth of donations from Weinstein.

“Chelsea, will the foundation give back the donations from Harvey Weinstein?” the reporter asked Chelsea as she left the CGI lunch event through a side door. “Do you plan to return the $100,000?”

Clinton Foundation press staff blocked a Daily Mail reporter from asking former President Bill Clinton questions at a public event the night before.

Bill and Chelsea appeared at Northeastern University to headline CGI’s annual student conference.

Democratic politicians including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) have all pledged to donate Weinstein’s political contributions to charity in light of the rape accusations.

The University of Southern California also said it would return Weinstein’s donations as more women came forward accusing him of sexual assault.

Hillary Clinton said this week that she would return the more than $35,000 Weinstein donated to her 2016 campaign but the Clinton Foundation has been largely silent on the subject of Weinstein’s donations.

Records show that Weinstein gave between $100,000 and $250,000 to the foundation.

The Clinton Foundation is no stranger to accepting contributions from donors with questionable reputations. The foundation has accepted millions of dollars from countries with records of treating women horribly, such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

Breitbart News Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer’s book Clinton Cash exposed a lot of the shady deal-making between the Clinton Foundation’s donors, Bill Clinton’s six-figure speeches, and the U.S. State Department’s actions while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state.

The Clinton Foundation laid off a good chunk of its staffers and closed the Clinton Global Initiative as a result of Schweizer’s book.


(10) Rose McGowan: Hollywood Blacklisted me because I got raped, because I said something

Rose McGowan: ‘Hollywood blacklisted me because I got raped’

Lawyer told Charmed star that she was unlikely to win against Harvey Weinstein

Mark Townsend

Sunday 15 October 2017 10.05 AEDT Last modified on Sunday 15 October 2017 11.51 AEDT

The actor Rose McGowan has said she was “blacklisted” because she “got raped”, and has vowed to chase down the individuals in the filmindustry who are “aiding and abetting” sex crimes.

On Thursday she publicly accused the Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein of raping her.

In a remarkable interview recorded in January 2017, obtained by the Observer and published for the first time, McGowan sheds more light onthe allegation while explaining that she never reported the rape to the police because a criminal lawyer advised her that she was unlikely to win. “Also, I didn’t want his name next to mine in my obituary; his name doesn’t deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as mine when I’m dead,” she said.

McGowan is one of more than 30 women who have come forward since the New York Times revealed sexual harassment and rape allegations against Weinstein going back decades. In a series of tweets last week she also accused Roy Price, the head of Amazon Studios, of ignoring her when she made the allegation earlier.

The accusations have raised questions over who knew about the details, with McGowan, 44, claiming in the interview that she was directly threatened after reporting that she had been raped. “They threatened [me] with being blacklisted. I was blacklisted after I was raped, because I got raped, because I said something … but only like internally, you know,” she said.


(11) Marilyn Munroe and the Jewish men who ran Hollywood - sexually fixated on the Shiksa

JTR {Jewish Tribal Review}

Marilyn Monroe is one of many Gentile actors who fell under the dominance of a string of Jewish psychoanalysts, including, most famously, Ralph Greenson (born: Romeo Greenschpoon) who was her therapist when she allegedly committed suicide. "Like many of his colleagues at the time," notes a review of Donald Spoto's biography of Marilyn, "Greenson relied heavily on drug therapy for his patients, routinely prescribing barbiturates and tranquilizers or having patients' other doctors do so. He referred Marilyn to [Jewish] internist Hyman Engelberg, who prescribed many of the medications Greenson ordered for her ... Her friends noticed that the more Marilyn saw Greenson, the more miserable she became ... Greenson encouraged Marilyn's deep dependency on him (he was seeing her twice daily)" (Good Housekeeping, 1993, pp. 212, 214).

The incestuous nature of Hollywood life may be observed in Greenson's case: his sister Elizabeth was married to Milton 'Mickey' Rudin, a Jewish entertainment attorney who was one of the town's major powerbrokers. Rudin was Monroe's lawyer.

Marilyn's publicist, Arthur Jacobs, was also Jewish. So were her agents at MCA, Jay Kanter and Mort Viner. Many of the directors of her films were Jews (for example, Billy Wilder of Some Like It Hot and George Cukor of Let's Make Love). Natasha Lytess, her personal manager and the subject of speculation about Monroe's rumored lesbianism, was Jewish, from Austria. Their relationship, says Barbara Leaming, was "mutually exploitive" (Leaming, 31). Milton Greene, a Jewish fashion photographer "with whom she'd reportedly had a fling during the late forties," was another early personal manager.    Monroe had resolved to sleep with anyone who could help her attain fame and fortune in Jewish-dominated Hollywood. Close friend Ted Jordan notes that she had "sex with anybody she thought might be able to advance her career" (Jordan, 121). [...]

The network of Jewish men that controls Hollywood has always been characterized by an intense sexual fixation on the shiksa -- shiksa being a derogatory slur for a Gentile woman, literally signifying "unclean animal" according to its Yiddish etymology. Hence the ubiquitous "casting couch," a Hollywood institution that provided Jewish powerbrokers access to otherwise unavailable non-Jewish women, whom they despised as non-Jews yet idealized as avatars of alien sexual desirability. The shiksa thus became the ultimate sexual trophy. The Jews who ruled Hollywood, noted Hollywood rabbi Edgar Magnin, "were men who made all that money and realized they were still a bunch of Goddamned Jews. Sleeping with a pretty gentile girl made them feel, if only for a few minutes, 'I'm half gentile.' No wonder they made idols out of shiksa goddesses."

A key agent in accelerating Monroe's early career was Johnny Hyde (like many Hollywood Jews, born in Russia, and a veteran of vaudeville.) She was also his mistress; he was 53, she was 23. Hyde "not so coincidentally ... was Ted Lewis' personal manager" (Jordan, 85). "In making Marilyn known," says Fred Guiles, "[Hyde] flexed a lot of muscle. The simple fact is that Johnny Hyde was the chief architect of her fame and her eventual legend" (Guiles, 147).

"By 1953," Jordan reports, "... [Monroe] could be virulently anti-Semitic (a prejudice that grew as she got older). To my discomfort she would sometimes refer to Joe Schenck, the mogul [and another sexual stepping stone], as 'that Jew shit' and to other Hollywood personalities as 'Jew' this or that. Occasionally I would have to remind her that I was half Jewish" (Jordan, 188). Monroe's anti-Semitism did not prevent her from later converting to Judaism, at the behest of her Jewish husband, playwright Arthur Miller, who (despite his vocal anti-racialism) would not wed an uncoverted Gentile.

The Hollywood world and its pressures of being a sex goddess of course destroyed her. Monroe's physician Hyman Engelberg and her therapist Ralph Greenson were the first to her death scene, reported to be the result of a drug overdose, but they did not call police for four hours. One investigative author, Donald Spoto, in a 1993 work, even burdens Greenson with the responsibility for killing her, directing that a female employee "administer [to Monroe] ... a fatal barbiturate-laced enema." (In this scenario, Greenson's motivation was that Monroe was trying to free herself from his influence and control, and had fired him [Wolfe, 99]). [...]

The preceding text is excerpted and edited from When Victims Rule, online at Jewish Tribal Review:


(12) Rabbi Dresner blames 'the Hollywood crowd' for Destruction of the Traditional Family - E. Michael Jones

Rabbi Dresner's Dilemma: Torah v. Ethnos by E. Michael Jones

E. Michael Jones, Ph.D. is the Editor of Culture Wars magazine, as well as author of several books available from Fidelity Press.

This article was published in the May, 2003 issue of Culture Wars magazine.

I never liked the title of Rabbi Dresner's book. It was called Can Families Survive in Pagan America? and was published in 1995 by Huntington House out of Lafayettte, Louisiana. ...

Families was an American book, but it was different than the plethora of jeremiads about the moral decline of America in the Bill Bennett mode. Dresner's book was about something else. It had a subtext that escaped its title. Families was really about American Jews, or, better, the effect that America had had on the Jews who came here largely in the aftermath of the Russian pogroms of the 1880s. Families was about how many modern Jews, in their search for passion and pleasure and power, have lost themselves in the kingdom of Caesar. ...

If 'the traditional family is under siege' in America, it is largely because of the influence of what Dresner calls 'the Hollywood crowd,' a group of people who praise 'rebellion, self-fulfillment, and promiscuity' and a 'debased view of the human body and spirit' which finds acceptance by 'none of the great religions of the world - and certainly not Judaism.' The Hollywood film, according to Dresner, has become a 'school from which one neither graduates nor needs to leave home to attend.' That school had a profound effect on American attitudes and behavior in the second half of the 20th century. According to Dresner, any study of the films which got produced from 1945 to 1985 would reveal 'a radical shift in values,' one which turned the world upside down. 'Hollywood came to adopt a permissive, value-free attitude in the course of a few decades,' and when it went down the drain, it dragged the rest of America with it. 'The underground has taken over. ... the avant-garde has become the man on the street. Bohemia is Broadway. The filthy jokes formerly restricted to burlesque houses and certain nightclubs' are now available on 'films and TV for the millions. Las Vegas is no longer a city but a condition' (pp. 316-7). Hollywood, in short, got corrupted around 1945 and is now responsible for the moral decline of American culture. ...

Today about two-thirds of leading TV and movie producers are Jewish. Four of the five companies that dominate American entertainment are run by Jews (Gerald Levin, who once considered a rabbinic career, runs Time Warner, Michael Eisner runs Disney, Mel Karmazin and Sumner Redstone run Viacom-CBS, and the Bronfmans run Universal).

This fact is rarely discussed in the mainstream media because Jews control that as well. When British journalist William Cash wrote about Jewish control of Hollywood in the October 1994 issue of the Spectator, Hollywood and its academic support troops reacted with rage verging on hysteria. In the November 13, 1994 issue of Los Angeles Times, Neal Gabler attacked Cash's article as 'an anti-Semitic bleat from a reactionary crackpot' which could have been dismissed out of hand 'if it didn't have a respectable platform in the Spectator and didn't play to a pre-existing prejudice - that Jews control the U.S. media.' Neal Gabler, it should be noted, is the author of An Empire of their Own: How Jews Created Hollywood. Gabler, in other words was attacking Cash, for saying what Gabler had said in his own book. According to Cash,

That every major studio head is Jewish today is no different from 60 years ago. 'Of 85 names engaged in production, 53 are Jews,' a 1936 survey noted. And the Jewish advantage holds in prestige as well as numbers. In a recent Premiere magazine 'Special Power Issue' - ranking the 100 most powerful people in the 'Industry' - the top 12 were Jewish. There were no black or British industry executives ranked.

Jewish domination of Hollywood, however, cannot be limited to numbers. The numbers simply give a pale approximation of the extent to which Jews determine the cultural matrix out of which the nation's films get made. Cash cites an instance of the 'extreme measures' non-Jews engage in to succeed in Hollywood:

Bill Stadiem, a former Harvard educated Wall Street lawyer who is now a screenwriter in LA, told me that he recently came across an old WASP friend in an LA restaurant who had been president of the Porcellian at Harvard - the most exclusive undergraduate dining-club. His friend - a would-be producer - was dressed in a black nylon tracksuit and had gold chains on his wrist; dangling around his neck was a chunky Star of David. Stadiem asked: 'Why the hell are you dressed like that?' The WASP replied: 'I'm trying to look Jewish.'

One need only think back to Jay Gatsby's attempts to pass as a WASP in F. Scott Fitzgerald's novel, The Great Gatsby, to see how the cultural equation changed over the course of the 20th century. As media and entertainment came to dominate the political and cultural landscape, the Jew eventually succeeded the WASP as the country's culturally dominant ethnic group, the group which set the styles for the rest of the nation.

But here as elsewhere the term Jew has to be defined. 'Jews in Hollywood,' according to one commentator 'like most Jews in the media, academia and pornography, tend to be radical and alienated Jews, rooted neither in Judaism nor in the majority Christian culture. They tend to be rootless and politically left of center, seeking to create a rootless cosmopolitan society to reflect their own non-Judaic traditionless values.' They don't cease being Jews because of that fact, however, nor do they cease to act like Jews, as Cash's article makes clear. Cash describes then 81-year-old Lew Wasserman as at the top of Hollywood's 'feudal power structure.' When Stephen Spielberg, David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg decided to form their own production studio, they first gathered at Wassenberg's estate to gain his 'rabbinical blessing,' after which 'they spoke in ‘hushed, reverential tones about the industry potentate,' and how he 'spun stories about the history of Hollywood and showed them artifacts.'

Wasserman had been Stephen Spielberg's mentor for over almost 30 years. Jews, according to Cash, govern the New Establishment, but they govern it like rootless and alienated Jews, which is to say, according to no Torah but the one of their own making. That means the application of traditional Jewish prejudice against majority culture with none of the restraint imposed by rabbinical interpretation of moral norms. That means, in short, moral subversion of the sort which Hollywood promulgated during the cultural revolution of the ‘60s, complicated by the fact that anyone who objects or even describes the situation, as the reaction to Cash's article showed, gets demonized as an anti-Semite.

'Few in Hollywood (can) recall such an anti-Semitic article in a mainstream publication,' wrote Bernard Weinraub, the New York Times' Hollywood correspondent in response to Cash's article. Hollywood in general concurred, filling the letters columns of local papers with one horrified reaction after another. One letter to the editor, whose list of prominent signatories included Kevin Costner, Sidney Poitier, and Tom Cruise worried that a new Holocaust and Spanish Inquisition could not be far behind.

The Battle over the Sexualization of America

William Cash's and Joe Breen's candor about Hollywood fills in what Sam Dresner's account leaves out. It shows that the battle over the sexualization of American culture was largely if not exclusively a battle between America's Jews and Catholics. From 1934 to 1965, Hollywood's Jews were forced to repress their 'permissive, value-free attitude' in matters sexual, or at least they were prevented from expressing that attitude in the films that they made. The golden age of Hollywood which Dresner indirectly praises was a collaborative effort; it was Catholics saving Hollywood's Jews from their own worst instincts. The Catholics eventually lost that battle, with dire consequences for the entire nation. Indeed, Rabbi Dresner's book is one of those consequences. His book is also an indication that the history of American Culture in the 20th century is in many respects a history of the sexual degeneration of the American Jew. That means the decline of the Rabbi Dresner Jew and the Rise of the Woody Allen Jew in his place as an icon for the entire culture. The Catholics lost the culture wars because they internalized Woody Allen Jewish values on sexuality, just as much as they adopted WASP values on birth control.

That, of course, leads to a dilemma for Rabbi Dresner. If we're talking about Boston's Puritans as the first and foremost influence in America, America was founded by a group of Judaizers, who followed a distinctly Old Testament version of Christianity, making America one of the most 'Jewish' of all of the 'Christian' nations.

Dresner is concerned that others have noticed the same thing. He cites a letter to the California Lawyer which claims that 'the progressive deterioration of morality can be directly attributable to the growing predominance of Jews in our national life.' Dresner is, of course, appalled, but his book is saying essentially the same thing. Is Rabbi Dresner, then, an anti-Semite? Given the canons of contemporary discourse, it depends on how we define the term. Israel Shamir, writing in the Israeli newspaper H'aaretz, recently said that anyone who objected to American global cultural imperialism could now safely be termed an anti-Semite. Unless, of course, he is Jewish, in that instance he is referred to as a 'self-hating Jew,' a term which can be defined as referring to anyone who disagrees with the party line as articulated by Abe Foxman, the Bronfmans, the ADL, the AJC and all of the other leaders and organizations that have tried to turn Jews into the avant garde of the Cultural Revolution.

How then can Rabbi Dresner claim that Jews can bring about a reform of family life and morals when he's saying that Jews are responsible for that moral decline in the first place? The answer lies in defining the word 'Jew,' and that means distinguishing between the Rabbi Dresner Jew and the Woody Allen Jew. 'Jews,' Dresner tells us in a passage I have already cited, 'have . . . played a less than admirable role in the sexual revolution. That, however does not mean that they speak for Judaism, any more than antifamily Jewish feminists do.' The issue, in other words, revolves around the question, 'who speaks for the Jews?' Rabbi Dresner is a conservative, for whom the Torah is normative. That means that 'homosexuality is a violation of the order of creation' (p. 81). That, in turn, means that, on the issue of homosexuality, Rabbi Dresner is at odds with the majority of American Jews. That, in turn, leads to a paradox: America has become more Jewish over the course of the 20th century, but Jews have become less Jewish at the same time, if we define the Jew the way Dresner does, as a follower of the Torah. The Jew has become an American Cultural Hero, but he has become that largely by espousing sexual degeneracy. As a result, America is becoming simultaneously more Jewish, but less representative of what Rabbi Dresner believes. 'Twenty years ago,' Dresner writes,

Time magazine ran an article claiming that 'the United States is becoming more Jewish . ... Among American intellectuals the Jew has even become a culture hero.' It went on to quote poet Robert Lowell, who declared that 'Jewishness is the center of today's literature much as the West was in the ‘30s.' Twenty years later (26 February 1990), Time repeated the same theme, informing us that 'Jews are news. It is an axiom of journalism. An indispensable one, too, because it is otherwise impossible to explain why the deeds and misdeeds of a dot-on-the-map Israel get an absurdly disproportionate amount of news coverage around the world.' (p. 275). ...

Even if Judaism was forged in opposition to pagan fertility cults (Rabbi Judah said in the name of Rav: 'The Israelites knew there was no substance to pagan idolatry. They took it up only to engage more freely in forbidden sexual practices.' ), Israel's 'victory over pagan idolatry was never complete. ... The Book of Kings . . . demonstrates how closely Israel came to being swallowed up by the powerful cults' (p. 140). ...

The conclusion which Dresner draws is inescapable. If Woody Allen speaks for the majority of American Jews, then American Jews have been corrupted; they are now no longer followers of Moses but rather followers of Shabbetai Zevi. In the process of succumbing to that corruption, they have played a major role in the corruption of American morals and culture. American cultural life in the last half of the 20th century, in other words, has been dominated by Jewish rebellion against the Torah and the adoption of the sexual practices and worldview of Shabbetai Zevi. The overwhelming majority of American Jews-as evidenced by the surveys Dresner cites-have defined themselves as sexual revolutionaries, and because of the disproportionate role which Jews play in publishing and the media, they have, in effect, established Sabbatian sexual degeneracy as the American cultural norm. ...

Luke Ford

Luke Ford was raised as a Seventh Day Adventist in Australia. He came to Los Angeles to study and after coming down with chronic fatigue syndrome, spent his time in convalescence listening to Dennis Prager's radio program. As a result of listening to Prager, he converted to orthodox Judaism. Since Los Angeles is the center of the pornography industry and since Ford was also interested in pornography, he noticed that Jews dominate the porn industry in Hollywood and decided to discuss the issue on his website, (Since this discussion - and perhaps because of it - has been taken over by the porn industry. Luke Ford's lucubrations on things Jewish, things pornographic, and things in general are now available only at Luke Ford noticed that 'secular Jews play a disproportionate role throughout the sex industry':

Leading modern Jewish pornographers include Ron Braverman, John Bone, Wesley Emerson, Paul Fishbein, Herbert Feinberg AKA Mickey Fine, Hank Weinstein, Lenny Friedlander, Bobby Hollander, Rubin Gottesman, Fred Hirsch and his children Steve and Marci, Paul 'Norman' Apstein, Steve Orenstein, Jack Richmond (Legend CEO), Theodore Rothstein, Reuben and David Sturman, Ron Sullivan, Jerome Tanner, Armand Weston, Sam and Mitch Weston (Spinelli).

Jews accounted for most of the leading male performers of the 1970s and '80s. Hebrew studs include Buck Adams, Bobby Astyr, (Bobby Charles) R. Bolla (Robert Kerman), Jerry Butler (Paul Siderman), Seymore Butts (Adam Glasser), Roger Caine (Al Levitsky), David Christopher (Bernie Cohen), Steve Drake, Jesse Eastern, Jamie Gillis (Jamie Gurman), Ron Jeremy (Hyatt), Michael Knight, William Margold, Ashley Moore (Steve Tucker), David Morris, George Payne, Ed Powers (Mark Arnold aka Mark Krinski), Harry Reems (Herbert Streicher), Dave Ruby, Herschel Savage (Harvey Cowen), Carter Stevens (Mal Warub), Marc Stevens, Paul Thomas (Phil Tobias), Marc Wallice (Marc Goldberg), Randy West (Andy Abrams) and Jack Wrangler.

Jewish female performers include Avalon, Jenny Baxter (Jenny Wexler), Busty Belle (Tracy Praeger), Chelsea Blake, Tiffany Blake, Bunny Bleu (Kim Warner), J.R. Carrington, Lee Carroll (Leslie Barris), Blair Castle/Brooke Fields (Allison Shandibal), Courtney/Natasha/Eden (Natasha Zimmerman), Daphne (Daphne Franks), Barbara Dare (Stacy Mitnick), April Diamond, Jeanna Fine, Alexis Gold, Terri Hall, Heather Hart, Nina Hartley (Hartman), C.J. Laing (Wendy Miller), Frankie Leigh (Cynthia Hope Geller), Gloria Leonard, Traci Lords (Nora Louise Kuzma), Amber Lynn, Tonisha Mills, Melissa Monet, Susan Nero, Scarlett O. (Catherine Goldberg), Tawny Pearl (Susan Pearlman), Nina Preta, Tracey Prince, Raylene, Janey Robbins (Robin Lieberman), Mila Shegol, Alexandra Silk, Susan Sloan, Annie Sprinkle (Ellen Steinberg), Karen Summer (Dana Alper), Cindy West, Zara Whites (Amy Kooiman) and Ona Zee (Ona Simms). (This citation, as well as all of the subsequent citations have been taken from the discussion of Jews and pornography at the website, all of which have been removed by the cite's new owners.)

If, as Ford notes, 'the Torah [Pentateuch] commands Jews ‘to be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation,' and Judaism strongly opposes porn, why do Jews dominate porn?' Is the ethnic connection purely fortuitous? Is it like the fact that many policemen in New York are Irish? Is there an ethnic connection between being Irish and law enforcement? Perhaps all of the Irish who got arrested in New York in the nineteenth and early twentieth century for drunken brawling were impressed with how policemen handled themselves. In other words, probably not. Is there some necessary ethnic connection between being Irish and putting out fires? Probably not. ...

Outraged Response

When William Cash wrote his already cited article in the British magazine The Spectator discussing Jewish dominance in Hollywood and, therefore, the pornography industry, the discussion prompted an outraged response from Abraham H. Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation League. To raise the issue meant that one was guilty of propagating an anti-Semitic canard, even though, in the case of Luke Ford, it was a Jew who raised the issue. 'Those Jews who enter the pornography industry,' Foxman opined, 'have done so as individuals pursuing the American dream, not as representatives of their religious group. Moreover, anti-Semites never seem to take note of the fact that the most prominent pornographers in America are Hugh Hefner and Larry Flynt, neither of whom is the least bit Jewish. Finally, though individual Jews may play a role in pornography, Jewishness does not.'

Foxman then fell back on the same justification for obscenity that Irving Thalberg used in his fight with the Legion of Decency. Pornography is controlled by 'consumers,' most of whom are Gentiles. Therefore, Gentiles are ultimately responsible for pornography. According to Foxman, even if Jews dominate a particular field, as is the case with both Hollywood and the related pornography industry, that bears no relationship to the fact that they are Jews, no matter how one defines the term. To say otherwise is to be an anti-Semite.

Foxman is being more than a little disingenuous here. In mentioning Larry Flynt and Hugh Hefner as the paradigmatic Gentile pornographers, he failed to point out that 1) that Hugh Hefner would object to being called a pornographer and 2) that Larry Flynt is a significant contributor to the ADL. He also failed to mention, as Rabbi Dresner points out in his book, that Hugh Hefner received the ADL's freedom award in 1980. Taking a less partisan view of the question, Dresner feels that

The religion of impulse likewise found significant Jewish involvement. An unusually high percentage of the material on sexual liberation was written by Jews, as well as among its advocates. On a more commercial level, for example, Jews have been strongly represented in the Playboy enterprises. B'nai Brith's Anti-Defamation League had no problem, for example, when some years back they presented their American Freedom Award at a fashionable black-tie dinner-dance to Hugh Hefner. ... About the honoree, the ADL says, with an apparent straight face, that the empire he founded has had a far-reaching impact, not only on the publishing industry, but on the mores of American society as well.

In other words, the ADL was rewarding Hefner for the role he played in bringing about widespread moral corruption and the spread of sexual deviance in America. The question remains, why would the Jews at the ADL be interested in rewarding this sort of behavior? Why, as Dresner asks in his book, did American Jewry remain silent when the ADL conferred its freedom award. 'Both the Jewish establishment and nonestablishment observers,' Dresner laments, 'took it in stride, raising not a finger of protest. It was Catholic William Buckley of National Review who pointed to the Jewish issue.'

And what exactly is the 'Jewish issue' here? The answer depends a lot on how the term Jew gets defined, especially by the Jews themselves. Ford claims that the Jews who dominate pornography are what Rabbi Dresner would call 'advocates of Woody Allen,' which is to say, Sabbatian in their orientation. It's, in other words, not a coincidence that they are Jewish and involved in pornography. Their involvement in pornography flows naturally from the way they define themselves as Jews. Luke Ford, according to one report, 'insists that pornography constitutes a deliberate attempt by ‘non-Jewish Jews,' alienated from normative Judaism and Christian mores, to undermine Western civilization.'

According to Luke Ford's discussion, the animus of the Jewish Cultural Revolutionary is historical and ethnic. Pornography is just one weapon in a panoply of cultural warfare which gets waged half in self-defense, half in residual animus against traditional majority Christian cultures, even when, as is the case of the United States, the original prescription no longer fits the actual situation. According to Ford,

that is their aim because they are Jews, and they are reaching for even more control than they already have. This is the historic modus operandi of the Jews. They are outsiders everywhere except in Israel, and when they first appear in any Gentile society and begin reaching for power they are resisted. The society treats the Jews as outsiders, as aliens, and attempts to keep them from gaining control. The Jewish method of countering this opposition is to work quietly to accumulate as much wealth as possible. At the same time they work to corrupt the society's leaders with money and to sow dissension among the masses, to set one social class against another, to break up the society's solidarity and its cohesiveness, so that there will be less resistance to their penetration of the society. ...

Jewish Porn Star

Nina Hartley (nee Hartman) also sees a connection between being Jewish and being a porn star. As Rabbi Dresner might have noted, it's a long way from the Torah to Debbie Duz Dishes, in which she plays 'a sexually insatiable Jewish housewife who enjoys sex with anyone who rings the doorbell.' Debbie Duz Dishes is Hartley's biggest selling, Jewish themed porn video. Hartley tried to articulate the connection between being Jewish and being a porn star in an interview with Jewish pornographer Sheldon Ranz in the Spring 1989 edition of the left-wing Jewish journal Shmate. She begins by making the sort of morphological distinction that Rabbi Dresner made in his book. She begins by explaining that she is 'Jewish culturally but not religiously.' That means that being Jewish gets defined in an essentially negative sense. Being Jewish means being anti-Christian. That means that 'I'm generally less subservient than a typical WASP female. And I've discovered certain gender interactions are different between Jewish and non-Jewish couples.' Hartley was born in 1956 and grew up in Berkeley, 'which is heavily influenced by [secular] Jewish culture. It's an intellectual town. A lot of the people who set the political agenda are Jewish.' Hartley, in other words, can see pornography as the fulfillment of 'Jewish values' because those values reflect not the Torah but rather the mores of secular Jews living in Berkeley in the ‘60s, a time of social upheaval. That means that 'there are things that you learn and ways that you think that you don't understand are more Jewish than not until you go into mainstream America and realize that other people don't think this way.'

Jews, in other words, are different than 'mainstream America,' something she defines as vaguely Christian. Since Jews like Hartley are not Christians, they define themselves as the opposite of Christianity. Forgetting that Christianity and Judaism both view the Torah and the moral code it expresses as canonical, Hartley then goes on to define the Jew as someone who opposes morals as the Bible defines them. Once again she makes a stab at justifying pornography as something essentially compatible with being Jewish. She can only do this, of course, by taking as normative not the Torah but rather the history of Jews as she has lived that history by coming of age in Berkeley during the ‘60s, which means, of course, accepting the history of Jewish secularization in the wake of the Enlightenment, and that means, of course, taking into account the influence that communism had on her parents' generation.

'I'm proud,' Hartley continues, 'of my heritage's intellectual history and its empathy with the persecuted. But I'm no Zionist. Politically, I'm left-wing. I want everyone to have a job, everyone to have food, clothing, shelter, medical care and education. Utopia might be communist but in the meantime we have to have socialism. I want everyone to have a piece.' ...

At some point, the baby boomer Jewish revolutionaries redefined the revolution. Unlike their communist parents, who saw the revolution as revolving around economic issues, the baby boomer Jewish revolutionaries saw the essential issues as sexual. Like Richard Pacheco, they took Wilhelm Reich as their guide, instead of Trotsky or Lenin, the quintessential revolutionary figures for their parents' generation. As Igor Shafarevich noted, socialism at its most basic has always had a sexual component. It has always meant the communality of wives as well as the communality of property. So the idea of 'democratic' sex has been part of the socialist tradition from the beginning. But the idea of sexual liberation has also been refined in the course of history as well, and the Jewish porn stars who see pornography as an expression of their Jewishness are aware of those refinements as well. In fact it was the earlier Jewish infatuation with socialism which made the Jewish justification of pornography possible. Hartley 'descends ideologically from the Marxist Jewish philosopher Herbert Marcuse who prophesied that a socialist utopia would free individuals to achieve sexual satisfaction. Nina descends literally from a line of radical Jews. Her grandfather (a physics professor) and her father (a radio announcer) belonged to the Communist party.' One of Hartley's brothers is an Orthodox Jew who is not pleased with her vocation as porn star. As a result, they don't speak to each other. Rather than leave it at that, Hartley goes out of her way to portray him as the black sheep of the family. Ranz echoes her animus: 'I don't understand how a family where the parents have a Communist background can raise a kid who grows up to be an Orthodox Jew. How did that happen?'

It is a classic instance of the transvaluation of values that is part of contemporary Jewish identity. Who gets to excommunicate whom? The Sabbatian Jews will naturally try to excommunicate the Orthodox as deviant. The fact that they outnumber the Orthodox so considerably makes their attempt less laughable than it might otherwise seem. The connection between Jews and pornography is like the connection between Jews and Bolshevism. Both are forms of revolutionary activity, ultimately traceable to Jewish concepts that have been secularized. Jews become involved in pornography for reasons similar to why they become involved in Communism, which is to say, not just because they happened to be Jews but because being Jewish as they and Sabbatai Zevi and Wilhelm Reich defined it found logical expression in producing pornography as a form of cultural warfare through moral subversion. Ultimately, the relationship between Jews and pornography is similar to how Marx described the relationship between the communist party and the proletariat. Just as the Jews were the vanguard of revolutionary activity in Russia, so they are in the vanguard of sexual revolution in the United States. The Jewish concept of the chosen people naturally transformed itself into the concept of the revolutionary vanguard as soon as the Torah evaporated as the core of Jewish identity. Messianic politics replaced waiting for the Messiah.

In The Politics of Bad Faith, David Horowitz described how a religious paradigm, the Exodus, became a political paradigm, in other words, how the eschaton got immanentized and transformed into a Messianic political movement. Dresner sees much the same thing. In becoming, in Dresner's words, 'the chief advocates of modernity,' Jews have dedicated themselves to Communism with a messianic fervor:

They became, for example, disciples of the new politics of communism. Some 30 percent of the early leaders of the revolution were estimated to have been Jewish. Emancipated from their ancient faith by the onslaught of modern thought, which the antiquated Judaism of the time was ill-prepared to refute, they transferred their yet unexpended messianic fervor into the new religion of Marx. (p. 325).

And when the attraction of communism began to pale they dedicated themselves just as fervently to sexual liberation. It would be naive, or as Haberer says, 'shortsighted' to claim in light of the overwhelming amount of evidence that Jews just happened to be revolutionaries just as Abe Foxman at a later date would claim that Jews just happened to be involved in pornography. Both communism and pornography are forms of revolutionary activity, and Jews were drawn to both precisely because of the hold that both Messianic Socialism and Sabbatianism acquired over them once this group of Jews abandoned traditional religious practice, something which happened to large numbers of them after they arrived in America. Nathan Glazer describes the process:

Judaism is even more vulnerable to the unsettling influence of modernity than is Christianity. Judaism emphasizes acts, rituals, habits a way of life. ... Once one had found-as so many immigrants did-that it was more convenient to work on Saturdays of to shave or to abandon traditional dress, one had no body of doctrine to fall back upon that could explain what remained really important in Judaism-indeed, the question was whether anything was really more important than the rituals established by God's word. Under these circumstances, an entire way of life disintegrated.

'Jews who came to America,' Elliott Abrams writes, 'were usually... not the most devout people in their communities' anyway. The decline in faith and morals, however, did not mean that they stopped defining themselves as Jews. Socialism and sexual liberation simply filled up the religious vessels from which the Torah had evaporated. Revolution, in other words, was another way of being a Jew, a secular humanist Jew of the sort Leo Pfeffer praised.

Irving Kristol, in his youth a follower of Trotsky and now a neoconservative, gives expression to the Messianic, universalist vision that both neoconservatism and Trotskyism have in common. The Jewish revolutionaries, according to Kristol:

did not forsake their Jewish heritage to replace it with another form of cultural identity or ethnic belonging. What they sought can best be described as an abstract and futuristic idealism of assimilation qua emancipation in a denationalized and secularized democratic society, ideally of universal scope. Leaving the world of their childhood did not necessarily imply its total abandonment in one act of irreversible forgetfulness. For many this departure under the sacred halo of socialism was the next best solution to their own existential problems - a solution that was enormously attractive since it also held out the utopian promise of the 'genuine emancipation' of all Jews in a socialist republic of universal brotherhood devoid of national, religious, and social discrimination or even distinctions.

As Irving Kristol, and other Jews have made clear, Secular Humanism is the continuation of revolutionary thought in a America. Just as socialism was attractive to significant numbers of Jews in Russia during the 19th century, Secular Humanism has a certain attraction among Jews now - indeed, if Kristol is right, among most Jews. Kristol's description of Secular Humanism highlights the similarities it shares with Jewish revolutionary thought in Russia:

where emancipation unleashed within the Jewish community latent messianic passions that pointed to a new era of fraternal 'universalism' of belief for mankind. What is now called 'prophetic Judaism' gradually edged out 'rabbinic Judaism' - the distinction itself being a derivative of the secular-humanist impulse. By the time the mass of Jews, mostly Central and East European, came to the United States, they were already secular-humanist in their politics, i.e., somewhere Left of Center-if not in other respects (Irving Kristol, Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea [New York: The Free Press, 1995], p. 448.

Secular Humanism, no matter how corrosive it is of faith and morals and a health social order is, as Kristol puts it, 'good for Jews,' because it ... permits individual Jews a civic equality and equality of opportunity dreamed of by previous Jewish generations. It is natural, therefore for American Jews to be, not only accepting of secular-humanist doctrines, but enthusiastic exponents. That explains why American Jews [like Leo Pfeffer] are so vigilant about removing all the signs and symbols of traditional religions from 'the public square,' so insistent that religion be merely a 'private affair,' so determined that separation of church and state be interpreted to mean the separation of all institutions from any signs of a connection with traditional religions. The spread of secular humanism throughout American life has been 'good for Jews,' no question about it. So the more, the better (p. 449).

In her recent memoir, An Old Wife's Tale, Midge Decter notices the same phenomenon, but with a little more Angst. 'It is no secret,' she writes:

that some significant part in the emptying of the [moral-religious] public square had been played by Jewish liberals. It was understandable to me why this was so, because their long history had left many Jews with an atavistic fear of Christian authority - so the more public life could be kept strictly secular the safer they felt. But understand it or not, I believe that the religion-free public condition to which they have made such a vital contribution had left American society, and particularly American culture, vulnerable to pernicious influences.

Influences like pornography? Suddenly Nina Hartley's description of herself as 'the blonde Jew' porn star from 'a long line of radical Jews,' who 'wants everyone to have a piece - a piece of sex, a piece of the means of production, a piece of a warm communist community' and 'a piece of the promised Messianic Age - now' doesn't seem as far-fetched as it does on first reading. The link between the Torah and pornography - in other words between the Jewish law and its antithesis - is Russian Jewish Bolshevism - with a big assist from Wilhelm Reich - and its American legacy, brought here by the refugees from the pogroms which the revolutionaries set in motion when they killed the Czar. Daniel Goldhagen's demonization of Pius XII is part of that ongoing struggle between the Jewish revolutionary mind and its main counter-revolutionary opponent, the Catholic Church. Then as now, the same dynamic applies. The revolutionaries by their actions generate animus against all Jews. When someone has the temerity to criticize the excesses of people like Goldhagen, the Jewish organizations like the ADL turn what is an issue of scholarship and truth into a an ethnic/religious issue, thereby creating the very thing they purport to oppose, namely ethnic animus.

Pornography is, in other words, one of the weapons which 'Jews with an atavistic fear of Christian authority' have turned to to weaken the dominant culture in a country and, thereby, assure that the Jews, always a minority, will go unmolested by their 'Christian' neighbors.

The Israelis have recently shown themselves well-versed in what one could call the military use of pornography. At 4:30 PM on March 30, 2002, Israeli military forces took over Palestinian TV stations when they occupied Ramallah in the West Bank, immediately shutting them down. What followed was a little more unusual. Shortly after occupying the Al-Watan TV station, the Israeli forces began broadcasting pornography over its transmitter. Eventually, according to a report from The Advertiser, an Australian newspaper, the Israelis expanded their cultural offensive against the Palestinian people by broadcasting pornography over two other Palestinian stations, the Ammwaj and Al-Sharaq channels. One 52-year-old Palestinian mother of three children, according to the report in the The Advertiser, complained about 'the deliberate psychological damage caused by these broadcasts.' The only Palestinian station not taken over by the Israelis ran a written message at the bottom of its screen claiming that 'Anything currently shown on Al-Watan and other local TV channels has nothing to do with Palestinian programs but is being broadcast by the Israeli occupation forces. We urge parents to take precautions.' [...]

Luke Ford makes a similar point in his discussion of Jewish involvement in pornography. 'Why does porn attract so many non-Jewish [i.e., Sabbatian] Jews?' Because 'even when Jews live in a society that welcomes them instead of harassing them, many Jews hate the majority culture.' Pornography is a way of weakening the majority culture by moral subversion. Hence, Jewish involvement in pornography. [...]

When Luke Ford asked Al Goldstein, the publisher of Screw, why so many Jews were involved in pornography, Goldstein, unlike Abe Foxman, did not say the connection was fortuitous. He instead got to what one might call the theological heart of the matter. 'The only reason that Jews are in pornography,' Goldstein responded, 'is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks. We don't believe in authoritarianism.' [...]


- Peter Myer