355. Difficulty at the beginning (V)

I once lived with a female relative for a time; she also lived with another, slightly more distant, female relative. The two did not get along and if I came home the female relative who did not own the house would offer to make me a cup of tea; then, while I chatted to the other lady in the living room, she would grumble under her breath in the kitchen until the whole conversation was disrupted.

The strategy is typically female and this lady took it to the extreme. She would find any pretext to make spiteful remarks from a position where everyone could hear, although she was not in the room. If you said,“What’s wrong?” she would go silent or—if pressed—start to complain that she had a right to exist and so on. It was an invitation to be beaten by making everyone else’s life a constant low-level misery, mainly because she could not stand not to be the centre of attention.

I have seen this behaviour a few times before, once with a woman who cared for her elderly mother; my colleague at the time was so surprised by the provocation that she said, “Shall we call social services?” I just thought my colleague had not seen very much of what people are like. As you would expect, my irascible relative was always threatening to call the police, social services, or the doctor—or sobbing to others that she was being “abused”. One time I walked into the kitchen and found the radio was on quite loudly, not that it bothered me but I turned it down. My relative, always in the process of non-verbal intimidation, assumed that I did it to subtly annoy her. Subsequently, she made sure to turn the radio up to the highest level in an effort to incite a beating.

This strategy of metacommunication also explains why the Jews are repeatedly pogromed. It is often observed that the Jews involve themselves in movements and ideas that deniably attack social norms in their host societies; and Jews often conceptualise this as part of their ethical mission to the world—a tendency to moralise, as women do. When, due to their higher than average intelligence, Jews dominate in the media and academia they “talk from the kitchen” at a vast scale; eventually the host snaps, like a provoked husband, and administers a beating.

A third party, an Englishman, say, watching a German will say, “Now, now what is this brutal behaviour? These people are practically powerless. We must put a stop to this beastliness—it’s like beating a woman!” The reason the strategy is beneficial—although superficially not rational—is that although a certain proportion of the Jews die in a pogrom enough survive to reproduce and they benefit from the subsequent sympathy many people feel for their plight; the reproductive payoff is probably high enough that what seems like a suicidal strategy is optimum in the long term—just look at Israel’s terrific birthrate. Similarly, the woman benefits from her actions by getting a sexually gratifying beating and perhaps having a man take charge of her.

Unfortunately, in America and Britain, we have removed the restrictions on Jews in the universities and the media that used to exist; and so they have spent about sixty years repeating the strategy at a grand scale; for if you look into who is behind ideas like “white supremacy” you will usually find a Jewish name. Hence it is quite likely the pogrom will be repeated again, although the West’s problems do not originate with the Jews. Finally, I cut the cord on the radio in such a way that it looked like it had frayed; it became intermittent and my relative got bored with the game. No need for a beating or a pogrom; of course, the way we discreetly cut the cord before was to not allow the Jews to enter certain elite universities, but it is too late now.