May 2003
PNAC, Zionism, and Supremacist Ideologies
by
Eduard Prugovecki
Two recent published articles, 1,2 accessible via this website, describe the great influence which a
think tank of neo-conservatives, by now commonly known in the press as
neo-cons, exert on the US foreign policy. For example, the first of these
articles, entitled The Shadow Men, reports: Robert Kagan, a neo-conservative
writer living in Brussels, says One finds Britain's finest minds propounding
conspiracy theories concerning the neo-conservative (read: Jewish) hijacking
of American foreign policy. In Paris, all the talk is of oil and
imperialismand Jews. A member of the French parliament quoted his
country's foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, saying the hawks in the US
administration [are] in the hands of [Ariel] Sharona comment seen in some
circles as a coded message about undue pro-Israeli influence exercised by neo-cons, most
of whom are Jewish, at the heart of the administration.
Later on, the same article qualifies the above statements by pointing
out that the neo-cons are part of a broader movement endorsed by the president, and
espoused, to different degrees, by almost all the principals involved, from Vice-President
Dick Cheney down (Colin Powell, the secretary of state, is a notable exception).
The second article, American Power, makes it totally evident
that the present US policy of world dominationfirst enunciated online on June
3, 1997 in a Statement of Principles for the Project of the New American
Century, or PNAC, and later elaborated in the September 2000 PNAC policy blueprint
entitled Rebuilding Americas Defenses: Strategy Forces and Resources for a New
Century3 largely favors the Zionist approach to Middle Eastern
affairs, and that even Christian Zionists belonging to Fundamentalist Churches
in the United States have a real influence in shaping the views of the Republican
Party toward Israel. Thus, Zionism emerges as a force that shapes present-day US
foreign policy.
AS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO GREW UP with Jewish in-laws and friends, I was highly susceptible for
a long time to Zionist claims, believing that Zionists spoke for all Jews, and that their
cause was evidently right in view of the great suffering European Jews had endured during
World War II. I still remember that, after first seeing the movie Exodus, I walked
out of the movie theater, wondering how the world could have allowed things like that to
happen to a people who had already suffered so much during World War II, and why the
British and the Palestinians were denying the Jews their homeland, out of which they had
been evicted by the Romans almost two thousand years ago.
Another factor that predisposed me in favor of Zionism was that, since
my mid-teens, my great hero has been Albert Einstein,4 and I knew early on that Einstein had become an ardent Zionist
right after World War I. I also knew that he had been a pacifist and a
socialisttwo political stances of which I largely approved. Hence, by a kind
of extrapolation, I concluded that Zionism was a good and humanitarian ideology.
But in the late 1960s I acquired a new neighbor in the apartment
complex where I was then staying in Toronto, and he was a medical doctor of Lebanese
origin. He was the first Arab I ever set my eyes upon, and as we were discussing current
political affairs, I gradually found out that the stories that I had been told about the
moral and legal right of Jews to take over the land of Palestine from the Arabs might not
have been the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
My new neighbor made me aware that the Arabs were Semitic people, just
as the Jews were, so that the term anti-Semite as applied exclusively to those
who were anti-Jewish was actually a misnomer; that the Palestinians were the most
culturally advanced amongst all the Arabs; that, just like the Jews who displaced them,
they highly valued education; that they had made the Palestinian desert bloom long before
the arrival of the Jewish settlers who had taken over their lands; and that the movie Exodus
was shown on American movie and TV screens each time a threat to Zionist policies of
domination over the Palestinians and acquisition of their lands loomed on the political
horizonin other words, that it was a one-sided film skillfully exploited for
Zionist propaganda.
Another critical factor at that time was that I came upon the following
passage5 in the extensively researched biography Einstein: The Life and Times
by Ronald W. Clark: I myself belong to no denomination and consider myself a
faithful Jew, [Einstein wrote in a 1921 letter]. In how far we Jews should
consider ourselves as a race or a nation respectively, in how far we form a social
community by tradition only, on this subject I had not arrived at a decisive
judgment.
This lack of decision was shrewdly noted by [the Zionist agent]
Blumenfeld, whose frank account shows clearly the skill with which he brought Einstein
into the Zionist camp. He realized that for Einstein Zionism and Palestine were only
peripheral concerns
Utilizing him for publicity purposes was thus a delicate
matter and was only successful if [Blumenfeld] was able to get under his skin in
such a way that eventually [Einstein] believed that words had not been put into his
mouth but had come forth from him spontaneously. (Italics added.)
Given the very high regard in which I held Einstein not only as a
scientist but also as a man, these were for me very revealing
statementsespecially the last passage, which I have set in italics. By
continuing to read Clarks excellent biography, I learned that although Einstein
subsequently remained a Zionist for the rest of his life, his belief [was] that a
first priority should be agreement with the Arabs.6 In fact, in a November 25, 1929 letter to the Zionist leader Chaim
Weizmann he wrote: Should we [Jews] be unable to find a way to honest cooperation
and honest pacts with the Arabs, then we have learned absolutely nothing during our 2,000
years of suffering, and deserve all that will come to us.7
Thus, I was eventually forced to admit to myself that I had been misled
as much as Einstein had been by Zionist propaganda, and that the case of the Palestinians
for justice and fair treatment was indeed very compelling.
My new Lebanese neighbor eventually introduced me to an Arab-Jewish
league, consisting of progressive Jews and Arabs who were trying to achieve a mutual
understanding in the Israeli-Palestinian conflictwhich at that time had
already lasted for decades, and which persists to this very day, with dire consequences
for the Palestinians and loss of many lives on both sides.
Although I am not a political activist, after attending a couple of
meetings of that ad hoc
I decided that the most effective way I could be of help was to bring
the goals of reconciliation of Jews and Palestinians to the attention of all my Jewish
friends and colleagues at the University of Toronto, and hopefully convince them to join
the league, so that they would in turn try to affect the way of thinking of their own
Jewish friends, thus producing a kind of chain reaction that would eventually bring mutual
understanding between the two sides. After all, there were progressive Jews in the league
who were trying to do exactly that.
In that very naive attempt I met with worse than dismal failure, since
my efforts resulted only in my eventually being blacklisted by certain elements within the
North American Jewish Establishment Arab-Jewish league, I knew that I had to do something
more than just provide verbal sympathy.8
and eventually brought great harm to my academic and scientific career.9 In fact, when I approached some of my Jewish colleagues at the
University of Toronto and explained the desirability of a peaceful and consensual solution
to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, I was immediately confronted with the issue of
anti-Semitism.
THIS ISSUE HAS BECOME since World War II an emotionally highly charged one, due to
incessant Zionist propaganda, largely based on the exploitation of the memories of the
holocaust of European Jews during World War II. Hence, anti-Semitism has
become unlike any other social attitude directed against a political, religious, racial,
national or sexual groupsuch as it is the case with
anti-communism, anti-capitalism, anti-Americanism,
anti-Catholicism, anti-lesbianism, etc. In a recent Amazon.com
online review of the book Zionist Connection: What Price Peace by the anti-Zionist
Jewish writer Alfred M. Lilienthal it is pointed out that [t]he fear of being
labeled anti-Semite is the main weapon used by Zionists to silence their
critics. This carefully nurtured emotional connotation of the term
anti-Semitism distinguishes it from terms describing the many socially harmful
attitudes directed in North America against Hispanics (known also as Latinos),
against African Americans (once addressed as Negroes), and against Native
Americans (still called Indians). All this despite the fact that these three
last racist attitudes have resulted in great suffering for members of these
minorities, and in the almost complete extermination of the last
minority (which once inhabited the entire North American continent),
constituting in the number of murdered people and the number of destroyed nations and
cultural heritages the greatest of all holocausts in the history of humankind.10
In North America any explanation of the special status enjoyed by the
term anti-Semitism that is provided by a Gentile scholar is bound to be
dismissed by many Jews as being itself anti-Semitic. It is therefore advisable
to turn to reputable Jewish scholars who have had the courage to confront the basic facts,
and state them publicly.
As a son of Holocaust survivors and a noted academic, Norman
Finkelstein carries all the necessary credentials, although his courageous
standwhich he shares with some other exceptional Jewish scholars, such as Noam
Chomsky, Israel Shahak, Alfred Lilienthal, etc.has apparently earned him in
Zionist and elitist Jewish circles the title of a self-hating Jew. Of course,
if this peculiar attitude were carried to its logical conclusion by other nations and
religious groups, any German critic of the master race aspirations of the
Nazis would have to be labeled a self-hating German, any Catholic critic of
the anti-abortion ideology of the Vatican would be declared a self-hating
Catholic, and so on, and so on.
One of the things that Finkelstein has done in his recent writings was
to dispel the myth of the Jews being perpetual victims. In particular, he
states the following: As the anti-Semitic barriers quickly fell after World War II,
Jews rose to prominence in the United States. According to Lipset and Raab, per capita
Jewish income is almost double that of non-Jews; sixteen of the forty wealthiest Americans
are Jews; 40 percent of American Nobel Prize winners in science and economics are Jewish,
as are 20 percent of professors at major universities; and 40 percent of partners in
leading law forms in New York and Washington. The list goes on [in the book Jews
by Lipset and Raab]. Far from constituting an obstacle, Jewish
identity has become a crown to that success.11
The above statistics appear even more remarkable once it is realized
that the Jews constitute only a bit more than 2% of the American population, so that, for
example, Jews are represented amongst professors at major universities in a
proportion that is ten times greater then their proportion in the general American
population.
The reasons for this unparalleled success story provided by
some Jewish writers echoes the master race attitudes of their arch enemies,
namely the Nazis. For example, Finkelstein points out the following disturbing attitude
among some American Jews: Who could any longer dispute that Jews are the
chosen people? In A Certain People: American Jews and Their Lives Today,
Charles Silbermanhimself a born-again Jewtypically gushes:
Jews would have been less human had they eschewed any notion of superiority
altogether, and it is extraordinarily difficult for American Jews to expunge
the sense of superiority altogether, however much they may try to suppress it. What
an American Jewish child inherits, according to novelist Philip Roth, is no body of
law, no body of learning and no language, and finally, no Lord
but a kind of
psychology; and the psychology can be translated in three words: Jews are
better.12
After having my own career as a scientist and academic severely
affected by the tactics of this type of supremacist Jews, I eventually became curious
about how widespread this self-aggrandizing phenomenon is amongst North American Jews.
Hence, I searched the Internet under the topic anti-Semitism and its polar
opposite anti-Gentilism.
To my surprise, I found a great amount of evidence which, most
regrettably, identifies a Jewish racism and anti-Gentilism reflected in supremacist
attitudes as being a rather wide-spread phenomenon: in one publication after another
certain Jewish American authors overtly claim that the Jews are unique,
distinct and superior, and that anti-Semitism is not at all a
natural reaction to such an incredibly racist and arrogant attitude, but that it is rather
due exclusively13 to the vile nature of Gentiles. It's always the
Gentiles fault, states Finkelstein at one point14 (italics as in the original) as if wondering at the chutzpah
of the Jewish elites that he criticizes.
A clear-cut example of this elitist Jewish presumption that Jews
are unique and distinct, and therefore entitled to special privileges, unwittingly
emerges from the following passage in the memoirs of the famous Russian physicist and
dissenter Andrei Sakharov, which deals with his Jewish wife's experiences during their
1988 visit to Canada.
Academician Sakharov writes that in answering a question about Jewish
émigrés from the USSR, Mrs. Sakharov (known to the public as Elena Lusia
Bonner) stated the following: There's a tendency to regard all Jews leaving the USSR
as political refugees. That isnt right or fair.
People can have other, fully
legitimate reasons to leave the USSRa desire to live well, to realize their
potential. But why do such [Jewish] people have a better right to call themselves
political refugees and to get special privileges than refugees from Vietnam, Cambodia, or
Armenia?15
Sakharov then describes how, as a result of this statement, which dared
to set Jewish émigrés on par with émigrés belonging to other ethnic groups, his Jewish
wife was accused of anti-Semitism and other mortal sins
[and] warned that
outraged Jews would picket [her and his] appearances in Winnipeg.16
In the face of such incredibly chauvinistic Jewish arrogance, is it any
wonder that many non-Jews react with disapproval? That most natural reaction is then
self-servingly labeled by Zionists and by supremacist Jews as
anti-Semitism!
BUT WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE presented by representatives of the Jewish elites in
favor of this alleged Jewish uniqueness and superiority?
Norman F. Cantor, described by his publisher as an eminent Jewish
scholar, professor, and writer, has the following to say in his 1995 book The
Sacred Chain: A History of the Jews: The Jews, once emancipated and given
opportunity for mobility, were genetically so superior that market capitalism could not
accommodate some of this superior species.17 Thus, according to Professor Cantor, the evidence of Jewish
uniqueness and superiority is genetic: The Jews are a
superior people intellectually and as long as Jewish genes exist, the extraordinary impact
Jews have had in the twentieth century will continue indefinitely.18
Does that sound familiar? I am sure that Hitler would have completely
agreed with Cantor if the term Jew were replaced in the above quotations with
the term Aryan.
However, some of the Jewish reviewers of Cantor's book find these
supremacist Jewish claims totally reasonable and acceptable. One of them even states on
its Amazon.com website the following: Th[is] book [by Cantor] is proudly Zionist,
having many passages that make you feel very proud of being a Jew and of our value and
achievement.
Instead of seeing us as a holy race set apart, Cantor has to ground
his Zionism in the superiority of the Jewish race, using the fact of the superior Jewish
Intelligence. This is clearly liberal Zionism and not orthodox. (Italics added.)
Thus, the main criticism raised against Cantor's powerful and
deeply learned voice is that it is not sufficiently orthodox, since
Cantor regards the Jews merely as being genetically superior to
all non-Jews, but not as being also a holy race.
Well, not even Hitler had gone as far as to assert that the Aryans were
a holy race. But only one Amazon.com Jewish reviewer finds the advocated
thesis of Jewish supremacy at all objectionable, as he states: The only criticism I
have of this important work is when [Cantor] uses the phrase genetic intellectual
superiority (p. 424) which I found disturbing in a work that includes a discussion
of the holocaust.
So, there we have it: Jews are genetically superior, and
therefore, by implication, deserve special consideration. Of course, this attitude lies at
the bottom of not only how the Palestinians are being treated in the territories occupied
by Israel, but also of how Gentiles like myself are treated in North America by
supremacist Jews when they point out the injustices suffered by the Palestinians.
I find the claims of genetic Jewish intellectual superiority as morally
objectionable as I do find similar claims by Nazi scholars in favor of Aryan intellectual
superiority, or those of white supremacists in USA, who assert the superiority of
Caucasians over other races.
In fact, the parallels between such claims were unwittingly underlined
by the Jewish scholar Raphael Patai, who, according to an online review19 of his book The Jewish Mind, [e]xamines the Jewish
mind and personality through three millennia, looking at the ways six historical
encounters between the Jews and other cultures have left their mark on Jewish
consciousness. Explores Jewish intelligence and the phenomenology of special Jewish
talents ... In the course of this exploration of Jewish intelligence
Patai tries to substantiate on genetic grounds his thesis of Jewish intellectual
superiority over all non-Jews by quoting the race theory of a Nazi named Hans Günther.
Thus, in the survival of the fittest scenario postulated by him natural
selection has favored over many centuries only the smartest Jews,20 and the allegedly self-evident Jewish superiority is a natural
consequence of this fact.
IT IS INTERESTING TO POINT OUT that the conviction21 of the Puritan colonists of North America that they were Gods
Chosen People and superior to all the Native North American nations has
led during the nineteenth century to a policy of virtual extermination of the latter. For
example, Stannard states on p. 120 of his American Holocaust: [Thomas]
Jefferson's writings on Indians are filled with the straightforward assertion that the
natives are to be given a simple choiceto be extirpate[d] from the
earth or to remove themselves out of the American way. Had the same words been
enunciated by a German leader in 1939, and directed at European Jews, they would be
engraved in modern history. Later, on p. 240 of the same book, while comparing the
great South American liberator Simón Bolivar (who believed that the Native South
Americans were the legitimate owners of the South American continent) with his
North American counterpart Thomas Jefferson, Stannard writes: Jefferson would later
write of the remaining Indians in America that the government was obliged now to
pursue them to extermination, or drive them to new seats beyond our reach.
The nineteenth century genocidal policies initiated by Thomas
Jefferson, Andrew Jackson and other highly respected US presidents were very
successfulso much so that on p. 77 of vol. 12 of the 1967 edition of Encyclopædia
Britannica it is stated: [E]vents [in USA] gave currency to the concept of the
Indian as The Vanishing American. The decision of 1871 to discontinue
treaty-making and the Allotment act of 1887 were both founded on the belief that the
Indians would not survive. Indeed, on p. 283 of James Wilsons The Earth
Shall Weep: A History of Native America, we find the following shocking but true
statement: In under four centuries, disease, warfare, hunger, massacre and despair
had reduced [the Native North American] population from an estimated 710 million to
less than 250,000. Eventually, the Native Americans did survive as a
racebut just barely, and for many of them their present status in the United
States is still problematic.22
It is interesting to compare the earlier cited supremacist ideologies
of some American Zionist and elitist Jewish writers with those of their Christian
counterparts of a century earlier. Thus, on p. 235 of James Wilsons above cited book
we can read the following: Charles Dawins The Origin of the Species,
published a decade after the [1850s] Gold Rush [in California], gave scientific racism a
new intellectual authority. Subtitled Or The Preservation of Favoured Races in the
Struggle for Life, it seemed to offer a purely biological explanation for the
global success of northern Europeans at the expense of other peoples. Where
the seventeenth-century Puritans believed that God had chosen them to populate the New
World, nineteenth-century Americans could now feel confident that nature had selected them
for the same purpose. Within only a few years, references of Darwin and the theory of
Evolution were commonplace in writing about Native Americans.
Thus, during the second half of the nineteenth century Protestant
American supremacists had used the same arguments that the Nazi supremacists had used
during the first half of the twentieth century, and that the Jewish supremacists have used
during the second half of the same century, and are still using them: all of them
justified their supremacist ideologies with assertions of genetic superiority
of their own species, which they based on grotesque distortions of genetics
and the theory of evolution.
Hence, it is no accident that supremacist Protestant Americans and
supremacist Jewish Americans are predominant in PNAC. The sorry present state of many
Native Americans and many Palestinians should be a warning to us all as to the
practical outcomes of such supremacist ideologies.
The invasion of Iraq provides the paradigm of how the PNAC blueprint
for the US world domination is going to be implemented in practice. Among other things,
this blueprint also [c]alls for the creation of US Space Forces, to
dominate space, and the total control of cyberspace to prevent enemies using
the Internet against the US.23
How long will it be before those of us who oppose this quest for empire, become the
enemy? asks the writer of the article entitled Project For The New
American Century: The Death Certificate For Our Republic.23
EDUARD PRUGOVECKI is Professor Emeritus at the University of Toronto. His website there
is: http://individual.utoronto.ca/prugovecki/.
NOTES:
1 The Shadow Men, published online in the May 4th, 2003 issue of Economist.com.
2 F. W. Engdahl, American Power: A great debate has just begun, in Studien
von Zeitfragen 37 (2003).
3 Both these documents are accessible via links on this website.
4 In fact, as a scientist I have dedicated most of my research efforts to a
program of consistent unification of Einstein's special and general relativity theories
with quantum mechanics. A systematic survey of this program is presented in my monograph Principles
of Quantum General Relativity (World Scientific, Singapore and London, 1995).
5 R. W. Clark, Einstein: The Life and Times, The World Publishing
Company, New York, 1971), p. 380.
6 Ibid., p. 397.
7 Ibid., p. 402.
8 J. J. Goldberg, Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment
(Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1996).
9 The persecution of Toronto academics sympathetic to Palestinian suffering
continues to the present day. According to an online publication of York University in
Toronto, there is now a controversial Web page that monitors the work of Middle East
scholars in an effort to expose and denounce an underlying pro-Palestinian bias. Mr.
Blincow said Campus Watch is an attempt to control the political activities of
academics, and thus a threat to academic freedom of speech. Critics at York
University and elsewhere say the site, which is four months old, has exposed several
academics to death threats and e-mail harassment, and intimidated others into
silence. (Cf. the website http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/479)
10 D. E. Stannard, American Holocaust: The Conquest of the New World
(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1993).
11 N. Finkelstein, The Holocaust
Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering (Verso Books, London and
New York, 2000), pp. 32-33.
12 Ibid., p. 33.
13 Ibid., pp. 47-55
14 Ibid., p. 61.
15 A. Sakharov, Moskow and Beyond: 1986 to 1989 (Alfred A. Knopf, New
York, 1991), p. 104.
16 Ibid., p. 104.
17 N. F. Cantor, The Sacred Chain: A History of the Jews (Harper
Collins, New York, 1995), p. 277.
18 Ibid., p. 423.
19 Excerpts from this Book News review are provided on the Amazon.com
website of Cantors The Sacred Chain.
20 R. Patai, The Jewish Mind (Charles Scribner& Sons, New York
1977), pp. 304-305.
21 J. Wilson, The Earth Shall Weep: A History of Native America
(Grove Press, New York, 1998), p. 92.
22 Ibid., Chapter 12 and Epilogue.
23 M. Gaddy, Project For The New American Century: The Death Certificate
For Our Republic, in the March 2, 2003 issue of Sierra Times,
www.sierratimes.com/gaddy.htm.
|