Babel Inc

by Kerry Bolton

This commoditisation of the arts is lauded by Zachary for its levelling, egalitarian outcomes, where one might say that the arts are becoming increasing democratic and international, seeking the basest level. Of course, anything that can be called ‘democratic’ is ipso facto regarded as the greatest good by the great mass of the befuddled who formulate their opinions on the basis of sound-bites or the current wisdom handed down from on high from Ellen DeGeneres or Oprah Winfrey. One of the reasons so many of the great artists of the epochal post-War War I era—Ezra Pound, D. H. Lawrence, W. B. Yeats, T. S. Eliot, Knut Hamsun, Roy Campbell, et al.[13]—rejected democracy and capitalism in favour of the Right and even of Fascism was that they saw capitalism and industrialism as the dumbing down of the arts in the service of profits, and ‘democracy’ as the political means of manipulating the masses in the service of money. Zachary upholds global capitalism as the means by which culture becomes a question of quantity over quality for the sake of global mass production and consumption.

  Big corporations are champions of diversity, not just in their hiring practices but in what they sell. They revel in differences because, more so than other institutions, they suspend judgement about quality, or the distinctive attributes about a thing or activity. To multinationals all qualities are equal. The only attributes that matter are size of markets and the prospects of profit.[14]

  That is the reality behind clichéd slogans such as ‘cultural enrichment’ through diversity. As T. S. Eliot explained, High Culture requires a fixity of place and a rootedness in tradition.[15] The impermanence and rootlessness of modern culture based on profit, has given us instead of a new Beethoven, Vivaldi, Leonardo, or Shakespeare, ‘pop’ culture ‘celebrities’ of usually fleeting fame. Such fleetingness of the ‘pop culture’ serves profit maximisation the same way as the planned obsolescence of automobiles, refrigerators, televisions, ad infinitum.

  However, the apologists for this ‘global me’ come back to what it all means at base; identity based on work:

  Indeed, work emerges as one of the new critical sources of identity: in many of the case studies of individuals that are scattered throughout The Global Me (some first written about by Zachary in his capacity as a Wall Street Journal reporter), professional ability or devotion to work is as defining as nationality.[16]

  The African slaves on the Southern plantations had more opportunities to maintain their identity than the produce-and-consume global mass that is being welded by globalisation. African slaves who knew who they were, had their own culture and their own kinship. The rootless masses especially of Europeans, both on the Continent and overseas, have no identity beyond their place on the economic treadmill. Furthermore, multiculturalism has interfered with the culture-building process of new nations, such as New Zealand and Australia. In terms of culture, there is everything in general and nothing in particular, and it is lauded a ‘cultural enrichment’ through ‘diversity.’

  However, according to the apologists of globalisation, such as Perlmutter, Zachary, and Pang, people are now ‘free’ from the limiting boundaries of kinship, to reinvent themselves ‘by how they work.’ Such ‘freedom’ seems very convenient for the international oligarchs who want to move capital, technology, labour and expertise across the world without the hindrances of ‘cultural nationalism,’ as Perlmutter put it. Therefore ‘cultural nationalism’—especially European culture and ethnicities—is condemned as ‘xenophobic’ and ‘racist,’ because it is European technology and European inventiveness that must be uprooted and placed in the cheap labour regions of the world. Meanwhile, the European states that provided the expertise and technology must open their borders to the imports that are produced in the cheap labour regions. Additionally, cheap labour must be free to be uprooted and placed in the European states; hence the call for ‘open borders’ from big business and its useful idiots on the Left.

  Multiculturalism is the high-sounding social control mechanism with which to reshape societies and people to accept ‘mongrel capitalism’ and globalisation as the waves of the future.

  [1] Jacques Maisonrouge, ‘The Education of International Managers,’ The Quarterly Journal of AIESEC International, February 1967, quoted by H. V. Perlmutter, ‘The Tortuous Evolution of the Multinational Corporation,’ Columbia Journal of World Business (January–February 1969), 15–16, http://www.vcc.columbia.edu/files/vale/content/Howard_V_Perlmutter_-_The_tortuous_evolution_of_the_multinational_enterprise.pdf.

  [2] Perlmutter, ibid., 12.

  [3] Cited by Perlmutter, ibid., 13.

  [4] Bolton, ‘Feminism,’ Revolution from Above, 160–200.

  [5] Perlmutter, op. cit., 17.

  [6] Ibid.

  [7] Ibid.

  [8] Alex Soojung-Kim Pang, ‘Mongrel Capitalism,’ The Atlantic Monthly, digital edition, November 2000, http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/2000/11/pang.htm.

  [9] Ibid.

  [10] Menasseh ben Israel, ‘How Profitable the Nation of the Jews Are,’ letter to Oliver Cromwell, ‘Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland’ (1655), in The Jew in the Modern World: A Documentary History, ed. Paul R. Mendes-Flohr and Jehuda Reinharz (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980), 9–12.

  [11] Pang, ‘Mongrel Capitalism.’

  [12] See ‘Hereditary Title-holders Who Married Jewish Women,’ in Arnold S. Leese, Our Jewish Aristocracy (reprinted by Sons of Liberty, California, n.d.), 5–6.

  [13] K. R. Bolton, Artists of the Right (San Francisco: Counter-Currents Publications, 2012).

  [14] Zachary, The Global Me, 208.

  [15] T. S. Eliot, Notes Towards the Definition of Culture.

  [16] Alex Soojung-Kim Pang, op. cit.

  The Jewish Factor

  The first Negro organisation founded to promote racial integration in the United States was the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), established in 1909. This has served as the prototype for other minority lobbies such as the Hispanic organisation MALDEF.[1] The idea did not originate with a Black but with the leading Jewish banker of the time Jacob H. Schiff, senior partner in the Wall Street international bank, Kuhn, Loeb and Company. Schiff was to become one of the primary financial backers of the revolutionary movement in Russia to overthrow the Czar.[2]

  Schiff floated the idea of the NAACP at the Henry Street Settlement, a socialist project founded by wealthy Jews, that assisted poor Jewish immigrants in New York City. ‘The NAACP evolved from meetings at Henry Street, at one of which Schiff made a fervent speech on behalf of the guest of honor, W. E. B. Du Bois.’[3] Du Bois, a founder of the NAACP, has become an iconic figure in the United States as a Black sociologist. Du Bois was a long-time communist, although he did not join the Communist Party USA until 1961, at the age of 93. Interestingly, Du Bois had resigned from the NAACP in 1934 because he opposed the movement’s total opposition to segregation, whereas he saw the benefits of voluntary Black segregation as a means of ‘self-dependence.’[4]

  Other luminaries of the Jewish banking fraternity who were founders of the ‘Negro’ organisation included Herbert H. Lehman, head of Lehman Brothers, who also became Governor and Senator of New York. Among Lehman’s other achievements was as one of the leaders of the Big Business coterie that pursued and destroyed Senator Joseph McCarthy, who erroneously thought that the main enemies of the United States were communists and Soviet agents.[5] The NAACP Legal Defense Fund, responsible for the court cases that destroyed separate institutions, and especially separate schools, for Black and White children, rendering U.S. education dysfunctional and schools as perpetually violence ridden, includes a scholarship named after the Banker-Senator, the Herbert Lehman Educational Fund.

  Although the ironically named Walter White, founding ‘chief secretar
y’ of the NAACP, was worried that non-Black funding of the NAACP would mean control of the organisation’s policies by non-Negro patrons, during the Depression he sought out funding from these sources. He realised that the association would be ‘more dependent on the contributions of “a few individuals or organizations which would control its policies.”’ During the Great Depression the NAACP became reliant on such donations. In 1930 Jacob Billikopf, director of the Federation of Jewish Charities in Philadelphia, and son-in-law of Louis Marshall, a luminary in Zionist circles and a leading legal counsel for the NAACP, introduced William Rosenwald, son of Julius Rosenwald, founder of Sears Roebuck to the NAACP, ‘who helped initiate a series of financial pledges from Jewish benefactors, such as Herbert H. Lehman, Samuel Fels, and Felix and Frieda Schiff Warburg,[6] as well as non-Jews such as Edsel Ford,[7] that saved the NAACP from financial ruin and possible collapse.’[8]

  While we are primarily concerned about multiculturalism as part of a Big Business strategy for globalisation and a world economic system, the Jewish factor includes an added motive to that of the Gentile financial world. Jewish financial and Zionist interests have been avid promoters of multiculturalism for Gentile states, while vigorously opposing it not only for Israel but for the Jewish people.

  Horace Kallen & ‘Cultural Pluralism’

  Zionism operates with a two-pronged strategy: (1) The exclusivity of Israel and the Jewish people are zealously maintained; (2) Any such ethno-nationalism on the part of non-Jews is as zealously opposed, and smeared as ‘neo-Nazism,’ ‘xenophobia,’ the prelude to another ‘Holocaust,’ etc. This is more than conjecture; the programme is explicitly stated.

  Horace Kallen has been heralded as ‘the first multiculturalist’ and as the founder of ‘cultural pluralism.’ Cultural pluralism is designed as an attack on the cohesion of a nation-culture-people. It is an example of where the aims of Zionism and globalisation converge, albeit not always with the same intentions. It is erroneous to assume that plutocracy and globalisation are merely aspects of an ‘international Jewish—or Zionist—conspiracy.’ The Jewish-born oligarch George Soros is primarily a globalist rather than a Zionist, and has been critical of Israel. Soros reflects the attitude of many Jewish internationalists, both capitalists and socialists, when he fears the conspicuousness of Jews as a separate people, especially embodied in Zionism and Israel, having stated before an audience of the Jewish Fundraisers Network in New York in 2011:

  There is a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe. The policies of the Bush administration and the Sharon administration contribute to that. It’s not specifically anti-Semitism, but it does manifest itself in anti-Semitism as well. I’m critical of those policies. If we change that direction, then anti-Semitism also will diminish. I can’t see how one could confront it directly.[9]

  Soros is also conscious of his own role in world politics and finance as encouraging beliefs that ‘Jews rule the world,’ stating: ‘I’m also very concerned about my own role because the new anti-Semitism holds that the Jews rule the world. As an unintended consequence of my actions I also contribute to that image.’[10] Senior Zionist lobbyists were angered by Soros’ frankness, and he was rebuked by Elan Steinberg, senior advisor at the World Jewish Congress; and Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, who called Soros’ comments ‘absolutely obscene.’[11]

  Here we have within Soros’ statements however, one of the aims of both the Jewish oligarchic and Zionist promotion of multiculturalism: that ‘anti-Semitism cannot be confronted directly.’ Rather the place of Jews in Gentile societies is secured through the destruction of national and cultural cohesion through ‘cultural pluralism’ or multiculturalism. The strategy is ‘indirect’ and the Soros ‘Open Society’ networks throughout the world expend billions in funding and directing programmes that are intended to destroy the traditional cultural, religious and moral fabric of societies, whether Muslim, Christian, or another. The promotion of feminism and liberalised abortion, or ‘women’s reproductive health rights,’ as it is euphemistically called, is particularly useful, as are programmes for drug liberalisation (in which Soros is particularly active),[12]multiculturalism, immigrant and ethnic minority rights.

  The American Jewish Committee, Anti-Defamation League, and American Jewish Congress have supported simultaneously both ‘cultural pluralism’ for the United States (designed to militate against the emergence of an ‘American Nationalism’), and Jewish nationalism. Horace Kallen as the founder of the theory of cultural pluralism and as a Zionist connected the two ideologically. Kallen was one of the first to advocate a multiplicity of cultures and peoples existing within the same land-mass as the American goal.[13] Kallen was also the head of the U.S. branch of a Zionist secret society called the Parushim, Hebrew for ‘Pharisee’ and ‘separatist.’[14] Jewish separatism was legitimatised to Gentiles by promoting cultural pluralism in general, with the view to making Jewish separatism inconspicuous among a multiplicity of other cultures. Yet, this cultural pluralism does not reject the assimilationist ideal of the Melting-pot, other than for Jews. In some type of dialectic a society is supposed to function as a cultural plurality but still within the ideal of the Melting-pot of ‘one world, one race.’ The American Jewish Archive, which is a depository for Kallen’s papers, states of Kallen: ‘Kallen’s concept of cultural pluralism affirmed that each ethnic and cultural group in the United States has a unique contribution to make to the variety and richness of American culture and thus provided a rationale for those Jews who wish to preserve their Jewish identity in the American melting pot.’[15]

  The aim is suggestive of Coudenhove-Kalergi’s prediction that the race of the future would be an African-Eurasian hybrid ruled by a ‘new Jewish nobility.’

  As will be seen in the concluding chapter on ‘multicultural dilemmas,’ what emerges instead is not what is often called ‘unity in diversity,’ but rather voluntary resegregation, ranging from ‘White flight’ to the suburbs to self-segregation in prisons. Hence the politicians are faced with trying to make the unworkable work, and go from assimilation, to cultural pluralism, and back to assimilation, rather than question whether any of these ideas is sustainable. The globalists, as we have seen, aim to establish a global hybrid culture, whether through multiculturalism, assimilation, or a combination of both. These are transition phases towards the aim of ‘one world, one race.’

  The Melting-Pot, Israel Zangwill, and Emma Lazarus

  The concept of the Melting-Pot strictly speaking stands in contrast to multiculturalism. One stands for assimilation into a mass, the other for the maintenance of separate cultures coexisting and inter-relating within the one state. The politicians seem to be trying one then the other without success. The term Melting-Pot was popularised by a play of that name by Israel Zangwill, a Jewish novelist and Zionist. In an appendix to the play, Zangwill explained:

  Meantime, however scrupulously and justifiably America avoids physical intermarriage with the negro, the comic spirit cannot fail to note the spiritual miscegenation which, while clothing, commercialising, and Christianising the ex-African, has given ‘rag-time’ and the sex-dances that go to it, first to white America and thence to the whole white world. . . . The action of the crucible is thus not exclusively physical—a consideration particularly important as regards the Jew. The Jew may be Americanised and the American Judaised without any gamic interaction.[16]

  Zangwill was saying that it is not necessary for there to be physical integration between widely divergent races; their proximity is sufficient to allow for a permeation of cultures between them. This has certainly taken place on a rapid and global scale since Zangwill’s time, and now encroaches on many peoples, states and cultures of the world, apart from the most isolated. It is what is now called ‘globalisation,’ and the cultural impact was foreseen with satisfaction by Zangwill. In his day he referred to ‘rag-time’ and ‘sex-dances’ as th
e means by which Negro culture was insinuating itself into ‘white America.’ Today, the African rhythms and dances, and not just the obvious types such as rap and hip hop, are the predominant styles of ‘pop music,’ however obscured by techno-beats. This ‘Melting-Pot’ culture that pervades the world is a primary means by which a global monoculture is being created at the service of mass marketing in the name of ‘diversity.’

  David Quixano, the protagonist in Zangwill’s play, sees America as being at root a rejection of European tradition, alluding to the Puritan founding fathers, and a secularised Puritanism has shaped the United States into its present character:

  David: Yes—Jew-immigrant! But a Jew who knows that your Pilgrim Fathers came straight out of his Old Testament, and that our Jew-immigrants are a greater factor in the glory of this great commonwealth than some of you sons of the soil. It is you, freak-fashionables, who are undoing the work of Washington and Lincoln, vulgarising your high heritage, and turning the last and noblest hope of humanity into a caricature.[17]

  This rejection of Europe as the requirement for the new ‘American crucible’ is dramatised shortly later by David, exclaiming:

  I would not stand indebted to them. I know you meant it for my good, but what would these Europe-apers have understood of my America—the America of my music? They look back on Europe as a pleasure ground, a palace of art—but I know [Getting hysterical] it is sodden with blood, red with bestial massacre.[18]