Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 40 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Stupid Jews Make Me Nuts
The only thing worse than an ignorant person is a person who does not know they are ignorant: they think that they are wise and intelligent, philosopher kings in all things. It is one reason why I hate politicians so deeply: they are so very certain of their wisdom and expertise as they shove it down our throats as if it were all really “for our own good.”
I have this same problem with people who were born into Jewish families, but know less than nothing about Torah Judaism – which does not stop them from dismissing the Torah as “foolish and superstitious.” They grow up secure in the knowledge that they are more enlightened than all their forebears: that they are, in fact, too enlightened to believe in anything at all, except their own intellectual greatness.
The problem is that these very same people of Jewish ancestry retain an obnoxious (if effective) sliver of what it means to be a Jew: to proclaim what you think is right, even if everyone else disagrees with you (trust me, I am aware of the irony). They might not be right, but that certainly won’t make them shut up.
I happen to believe that the most evil and destructive anti-Torah people were, invariably, born Jewish. Spinoza. Marx. Freud. And many others.
The devils of our age are fallen angels. Like the Satan of Christianity, these evildoers started off with the possibility of being forces for good – but then they could not resist the intoxicating temptation to turn others away from G-d: they fell just as surely as Satan did.
Note that I do not call these born-Jews “stupid.” For they were most assuredly supremely gifted in intellectual capability. But being smart did not make Spinoza wise: he attacked the concepts of free will, revealed religion, received ideas, tradition, and morality. A Jew who left school at the age of 14 considered himself sufficiently wise to discard everything that made his very existence possible. The world of intellectuals lapped it up, conforming as it did to their own conceits about the superiority of the intellect over religion.
Which brings us to the founder of Communism. Marx was no dummy. He was just wrong. The death toll from his misbegotten and totally ignorant ideas is mind-boggling, dwarfed only by the opportunity cost of what might have been if his ideas had never been shared. Another devil.
And Freud? While Marxism killed an enormous number of people, Freudianism, the dominant way of thinking about peoples’ very thoughts in most of the 20th century, continues to plague us today. Freud taught that nothing is really our fault. Freud attacked the notion of true personal responsibility, spreading the mind virus that none of us are truly capable of free will. That belief is, of course, a self-fulfilling prophecy. Freud’s diseased logic built right off Spinoza and yes, even Marx, who believed that external forces necessarily and always overcome the individual. And people adore this way of thinking: Freudianism justified every self-indulgent neurosis, sucking away human potential and creative energies. He gave everyone license to follow their appetites and blame others for them, to wallow in navel gazing and learned helplessness. Freud produced the intellectual bedrock of today’s diseased society.
Thanks to Freud, for 50 years, the world of intellectuals knew – beyond a shadow of a doubt – that any male who denied lusting after his mother was, of a certainty, just reinforcing the fact of that lust. The entire logic is bonkers. It was bonkers then, too. But that didn’t stop smart people from believing it. Beware of ignorant Jews.
I read recently of the famous “Anna,” a subject of Freud’s work. This poor woman was almost killed by the “treatment” administered to her.
According to Breuer, the many hours he spent with Pappenheim ultimately resulted, in 1882, in her complete cure. But Breuer’s actions belied his claim. That year, Breuer had her transferred to a sanitarium, where she spent most of the next two years and another two months in 1887. During the course of her stays, she was probably treated with and became addicted to morphine, in addition to chloral hydrate. Talking, alas, was not a miracle cure after all. Eventually, she got away. And she straightened herself out.
By the turn of the century, she had achieved prominence as an advocate and activist for vulnerable women and families. She founded the social-welfare organization the League of Jewish Women (ultimately dissolved by Hitler) and was a pioneer in the fight against international sex trafficking.
Because her personal papers did not survive World War II, there is much more about her life that we do not and cannot know, including how she herself looked back on her psychological ordeal. One clue: She reportedly remarked that “as long as I live, psychoanalysis will never penetrate” her organizations.
And Freud’s made-up fantasies about this very woman became the basis of all “educated” ways of thinking about how people think?! It is sheer madness.
And we have yet to outgrow it! Our own Joseph Epstein recently reviewed a book about Freud. Absent were any of the observations seen above, the fact that Freudianism has enabled and authorized every whining self-obsessed activist today, the fact that it sucks free will and positive individual growth out of every society it touches. Instead, Epstein ends the review with:
Psychoanalysis was never about morality, either teaching it or practicing it. It was, and remains, instead, about healthy skepticism, about rejecting the illusions of full-time happiness and instead living in acceptance of what Freud, along with Josef Breuer in their book, “Studies on Hysteria” (1895), called “ordinary unhappiness.” The therapist Susie Orbach, in her essay in “On the Couch,” takes this phrase to mean not living in unhappiness but being able “to live inside and from oneself with all its conflicts and longings and the connections it is possible to make with others.” Ordinary unhappiness—sounds to me not a bad place to be. Where do I get a ticket?
If I was not so angry, I would weep.
Of course, we today are no strangers to mass psychosis. Indeed, we tend to focus on the irrationalities of our age. In 2024, we are still infected by the practitioners of the Covid Mask, publicly declaring their eagerness to wallow in human frailty and fear.
But we must not forget that mass madness is as old as time. The English used to be obsessed with rabies from their dogs, even though death rates were low – while tuberculosis cut through the population like a scythe. Nobody cared then. And nobody cares about facts like this now.
We have been poisoned by these fallen angels to think that there is no free will, that the individual is not important, that Philosopher Kings can and should dictate the affairs of men for the Greater Good. We are taught that nothing is our own fault – we can blame nature or nurture, but certainly not ourselves, never ourselves.
Jews who know nothing of the Torah become its greatest enemies. I am pretty sure that Spinoza, Marx and Freud, for all their ignorance, knew at least that much.
Published in General
This happens in Christianity, as well…
I’d deny that Marx wasn’t stupid. His perfect, classless state free of government was never going to happen. Attempting to realize the phase he saw as transitional (central planning of all economic activity) was going to result in more government, not less, with no limiting factor. The State was never going to wither away. He believed that his half-witted, threadbare theology would transform human nature. Utter bosh.
His ideas were wrong. But his brilliance may well have been in the marketing of them. One way or another, Marxism seduced an awful lot of people.
Someone, somewhere, is the world’s best seller of tripe. But it’s still only tripe. Marx’s socioeconomic version was poisonous. It got a lot of people killed.
I absolutely agree. I am just making a distinction between tripe that sells and tripe that does not. The former reflects some kind of genius. We may not like evil people, but we would be fools to ignore them.
The Communist Manifesto was, intellectually speaking, garbage. But it was effective propaganda.
iWe, you have the Torah street cred to write about stupid Jews. I expect many of the current ones will call you names, but we know better. And who are the stupid ones – Spinoza, Marx, and Freud, or all those who bought into their ideas?
On the Christian side of Judeo Christianity, we call it the fallen nature of man. We are disappointed, but not surprised.
In my own life, I have taken the gracious attitude of using the term “foolish” instead of stupid. It has to do with hope that, knowing God is in charge, things will work out in spite of
stupidfoolish people.The most dangerous are the originators of the ideas. But everyone who falls for them makes it worse.
Ideas shared are doubled. So it matters whether those ideas are good or not.
Torah Judaism gives us more of a role in fixing the ills of the world. We don’t believe that we are allowed to simply leave things in G-d’s hands. He wants us to act as his partners in this world, to choose to combat evil, and then do so.
Preached this myself.
Or maybe I just said this to my kids.
Or maybe I lectured on it.
Definitely something!
Christians also believe they are partners and are called to do good works in this world. And most of us believe we have the free will to make those kind of choices. The reason I prefer “foolish” to “stupid” is that such a person, as long as they are still alive, can change their mind. They have fooled themselves and others because of their separation from Torah and other biblical wisdom.
@iwe
My remarks below hopefully show an example of such thinking.
First of all I’m not Jewish but a recent quote by a self-professed Jew interviewed by the BBC greatly irritated me. On the April 24, 2024, edition of the BBC Newshour, their reporter interviewed a young Jewish man by the name of Oren. The interview did a good job in the interview. Oren, however, appalled me with his answers. He was on his way to stand in solidarity with the pro-Hamas protesters at Columbia. Listen in at about 48:17.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w172zb8tnh289nf
Oren heard there was National Guard on their way to oppose the protesters and that motivated him to join them in solidarity against the repressive American government. Of course the NG was not on their way which represents the first false narrative that Oren spouted.
Next Oren relates his recent attendance at the Passover celebration which was the first recorded “slave revolt” in history. This begins what for me is the really irritating false narrative. He interprets the events of Exodus as a “holiday about solidarity, about freedom and about freedom only coming through the struggle of the oppressed.” What kind of rabbi teaches such nonsense? How in the world did “the oppressed” cause the water in the Nile to become blood? How did that struggle bring the plague of frogs, gnats, flies, and locusts? Did “the oppressed” do something on their own that caused only the Egyptian cattle to die or boils only irritate the skin of the Egyptians? What human struggle caused hail to fall from the sky or darkness to last 3 days over the land of Egypt? And of course who was it that kept the destroyer from killing the firstborn of the Hebrew slaves?
Oren interprets Exodus from an obvious Marxist lens. He thinks he holds the correct view of events but it is so stupid as to be laughable. But the humor quickly recedes when you realize his warped view is leading to the destruction of his own people. Oren is an example of a Jew who thinks he understands the Torah from some elevated intellectual paradigm. But he is intellectually stupid and is causing real evil in the world with that interpretation.
Re: subject as above… Caiaphas ranks up there, so do many of the Kings after Solomon – they drove people nuts, those who spoke up didn’t end well, generally.
I’ll put a ten spot on all of the above.