Is Anti-Semitism ‘Brown-Coded’ or ‘Third Worldist’?

Recently there has been an attempt by individuals who have literally or metaphorically ‘kissed the wall’ to claim that anti-Semitism is somehow ‘brown-coded’ or ‘third worldist’; their agenda is fairly obvious and as my friend Morgoth has been covering the word and frame games that are being played jews in the United States and elsewhere. I figured I’d cover this particular argument which is primarily coming from so-called ‘conservatives’ in Europe but particularly in Britain.

The first thing to say about this is that it is an old jewish/Israeli argument dating back to circa 2005 if not slightly earlier and is generally credited to an Israeli jewess named Bat Ye’or (nee Gisele Littman/Gisele Orebi) whose 2005 book ‘Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis’ is considered the foundational text of the theory.

Ye’or argues - in essence - that ‘European bureaucrats’ have – since the 1970s – been in alliance with Islamists to ‘destroy Europe’ and to subjugate and enslave it all as Western civilization more broadly (and thus also Israel in Ye’or’s view) to Islam by a kind of ‘jihad by stealth’ and inculcating a subservient attitude to Islam (‘Dhimmitude’). Now typically Ye’or doesn’t say who these ‘bureaucrats’ and ‘fascists’/’communists’ were particularly, but she heavily implies they were/are ‘Nazis’ and/or Marxists which are apparently the same in her view.

As such Ye’or’s ‘Eurabia’ theory does two important things: it provides a vague explanation/rationale for the Great Replacement, and it reverses the role of the jews – she is herself a proud Israeli jewess and a so-called ‘Holocaust Survivor’ - from being perpetrators of the Great Replacement to its real victims.

This then is classic jewish projection since gone are the jews who were so instrumental to the political left that laid the basis for modern negrophilia and orientalism from the 1920s to the 1950s, the highly destructive Counterculture of the 1960s and 1970s and then the ‘World is Flat’ race-blind ‘outsource everything’ hyper-capitalism of the 1980s to 2000s.

Instead jews are flipped around as being the perpetual victims of what amounts to a ‘conspiracy of totalitarians’ – be they communists, fascists, Nazis and/or Islamists - to destroy Western civilization and jews are instead the proverbial ‘canary in the coalmine’.

We are told how jews are in fact the ‘origin’ of Western civilization – a thesis much loved by Zionists (jewish and non-jewish) – rather than Greeks and the Romans as well as how there is a ‘Judeo-Christian heritage’ – this is in fact a modern invention that only gained traction in the 1980s and 1990s and in fact Judaism views Christianity as a form of paganism (as does Islam) and as such is (like actual paganism; usually Egyptian-Greco-Roman) historically regarded as its most intractable religious opponents – which apparently mandates Western civilization to write a blank cheque to their ‘religious older brothers and sisters’ the jews.

The point is simple in that Ye’or and the numerous proponents of the ‘Eurabia’ theory are weaponizing the fact of the demographic replacement of Europeans by non-Whites – particularly in their view non-White Muslims such as Arabs – but rather than mention race; they lay it at the door of mere religion.

This results then in what we may call blank-slate anti-Islamic multi-culturalism rather than… well… blank-slate Third Worldist multiculturalism that is so often parroted by the counter-jihadi types like Robert Spencer, Fjordman and Douglas Murray.

That counter-jihadis are invariably also paid – and heavily promoted – by Israel, jews and/or ‘Christian Zionists’ (Shabbos Goyim/Judaizers/Noahides in effect) goes without saying (Spencer has been dependent on/owned by David Horowitz since circa 2001, Fjordman has also been dependent on/owned by David Horowitz since circa 2004/2005 and Murray has been in the extraordinarily jewish world of ‘neo-conservatism’ since at least 2005/2006) precisely because the ‘Eurabia’ theory - while being a creation of Bat Ye’or and thus is actually a jewish invention - also has significant appeal in and of itself and is why Israel and its non-jewish supporters have been so keen to on it.

This is because ‘Eurabia’ theory gives Israel and the jews – as well as their apologists and supporters – the opportunity to turn history on its head – as they so often do – and claim that in fact Israel is a ‘bastion of freedom’ and ‘Western civilization’ – in truth it is neither – in the Middle East and represents the only successful model available to show ‘how to stop Eurabia occurring’.

You might recognize this logic from neo-conservative, conservative, ‘classical liberal’ and Christian Zionist talking points from a wide spectrum of different authors and speakers and this is because it presents a ‘safe right-wing political model’ where-in Israel and jews are placed on an intellectual pedestal as untouchable arbiters of morality – reinforced by their status as the ‘eternally persecuted’ ones and ipso facto ‘Holocaust Survivors’ – but are also:

1) Safe-guarded from their traditional enemies with Western civilization by the tabula-rasa colour-blind element; this dilutes the voter pool causing Europeans to focus on the immediate problems (i.e., the symptoms) not the root causes (i.e., the jews).

2) This also enables (often jewish) capitalists to generate increased profits via keeping wage bills low (by mass immigration; since remember the problem isn’t non-Whites or mass immigration but rather Islamic mass immigration) or outsourcing for corporations whose shares increase in value causing jews to profit and be able to lavishly fund pro-jewish/pro-Israel advocacy groups (including these same counter-jihadis).

3) In turn this generates a vast reserve of political and intellectual capital by essentially funding academics/politicians/think tanks and calling in the debt as and when required in a perpetual of cycle of ‘cash for influence’, which allows jews to create and pass policies and deals that siphon off money to jewish and Israeli interests (such as the Israeli-American Free Trade Agreement, the billions sent to Israel every year as ‘aid’ in various different forms as well as ensuring American foreign policy always reflect Israeli – not American – interests first).

4) The ‘Anti-Islam’ element – in truth this is rarely not anti-Islamic in general but rather takes the form of the belief/claim that ‘Islam is need of a Reformation’ which is a proxy way of arguing/claiming that Islam needs to become ‘Judeo-Islamic’ in the same way Christianity has become ‘Judeo-Christian’ for many Western (primarily American) Christians – then keeps the non-traditional enemies of the jews (Muslims) out of power and thus transforms them – along with the new ‘pro-Israel migrants from the third world’ - into an asset from a liability to the jewish cause.

Thus, it is pretty obvious why Israelis, jews and their paid lackeys have been so keen on the ‘Eurabia’ theory in that it doesn’t threaten their Great Replacement agenda one bit – it merely recasts the problem as Islamic immigration with the unsaid addendum ‘because it is bad for jews’ and recasts Israel (and thus also the jews) as the ‘saviours of the West’ – but merely creates the simulacrum of a solution to appease the Europeans and their Diaspora, while the Great Replacement acts as the both the great looting of Europe by the jews and the Final Solution of the European Question enacted by the jewish people.

I have occasionally styled this as the Samson Option 2.0 because that is essentially what it is.

This in turn brings us to an unsurprising development to students of the jewish question; although it has surprised – and continues to be surprising – to many others not so acquainted with jews and their perfidious behaviour.

The development in question is the fact that many jews – both Israeli and non-Israeli as well as across the political spectrum from the left to the right – have now endorsed the ‘Eurabia’ theory not as a problem for Israel – Ye’or’s original proposition as well as the line adopted by counter-jihadis historically and currently – but rather as a solution to Israeli and jewish problems.

What I mean by that is that they see ‘Eurabia’ as an opportunity to further their interests.

How does that work?

Well simply put: the jewish left (Zionist and anti-Zionist) sees it as an opportunity to make Diaspora jewry eternally safe by completely replacing traditionally hostile European populations with a disordered disorganized brown and black mass – remember jews see non-jews as precisely this (this is implicit in the concept of the jews and gentiles [jews and lit. ‘the nations’]) - that can be easily exploited for profit by a heavily jewish elite class and if there is the problem – for example the goyische underclass successfully rises against the jewish elite class – then these jews can quickly flee to Israel, which has been made safe by deporting and exporting all the Palestinians among others to Europe, North America and Oceania.

The jewish right – which is almost entirely Zionist – by contrast sees ‘Eurabia’ as a foregone conclusion as well as ‘revenge for the Holocaust’ and as such European opposition to Israel’s expansionism and treatment of Palestinians as well as general support for them is seen as a way to enact both the Final Solution of the Arab/Palestinian Question and the European Question by deporting/exporting all the Arabs/Palestinians within Gaza and West Bank (as well as potentially all of ‘Greater Israel’) to Europe so ‘the Europeans who love them so much can deal with them’.

This is advocated in the full knowledge that the end result of such a policy would be the mass extermination of the Europeans and their Diaspora by the Arabs/Palestinians or vice versa.

The point of such a policy is to secure ‘living space’ for the jews in Israel and to ensure Israel’s long-term security and economic viability, while also weakening Israel’s opponents by creating demographic conflict via mass immigration but which in turn safeguards Diaspora jewry – who act as Israel’s primary economic conduit and to a large extent its sugar daddies – and makes Israel’s foreign policy objectives easier to achieve.

This is why the jewish right – such as Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich – and the jewish left – such as Barbara Lerner Spectre and Tim Wise – have almost the same policy recommendations when you get past their bluster and rhetoric; they want Europe and its Diaspora to be politically powerless and wiped out once and for all in order to make the world safe for jewry.

Recognition of this fact has been at the heart of the Great Noticing of 2023 to 2025 and as jewry’s supporters have increasingly lost the intellectual and propaganda battle; they have begun to turn increasingly to new paid lackeys – who often openly deny they are paid lackeys despite having gone on strange free holidays to Israel (hello Connor Tomlinson) – with a semi-decent claim to be on the political right – since nationalism is increasingly in the political ascendent across Europe, North America and the United States so they are trying to belatedly co-opt it before the Treason Trials begin and jews start getting herded into ghettos – to try and craft a narrative to defeat the resurgent and highly aggressive anti-Semitic nationalist right.

To do this these newly minted myrmidons have sought to re-work Ye’or’s ‘Eurabia’ theory into the idea that ‘anti-Semitism’ is somehow ‘brown-coded’ or ‘Third Worldist’; the logic is both fairly obvious and simple enough.

Because one of the lightning rods – and principal issues – of modern anti-Semitism is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; anti-Semitism is claimed to therefore support brown (and thus third world) people over White people (Europe and its Diaspora plus sneaking the jews into the equation) so thus anti-Semitism is ‘brown-coded’ and ‘Third Worldist’.

Therefore, to be ‘anti-Semitic’ is to ‘oppose the interests of Europe and its Diaspora’ by focusing energy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and defending brown people when Europe is suffering the Great Replacement.

This is as deceptive as it is manipulative since it rests on a number of fallacious – and dare I say stupid – assumptions/unsubstantiated beliefs.

These are as follows:

1) That anti-Semitism is inherently about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

This is simply untrue since anti-Semitism is much broader than just the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and has always focused far more on jewish behaviour and conduct outside of Israel/Palestine than it has what goes on in Israel/Palestine.

What it does reference in relation to the Israeli-Palestine conflict is point out that Israeli and jewish actions, beliefs and conduct towards the Palestinians – as well as the Arabs more generally – acts as a proof of anti-Semitic theses about what jews really think, how they and how they would – and do – treat Europeans and their Diaspora if they ever got to rule as completely as they do in Israel.

Thus, we can see that the original claim is inherently fallacious and seeks to dishonestly recast anti-Semitism as merely being about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which illustrates that the proponents of this argument’s view is Judeocentric (i.e., it places jews not Europeans first) while anti-Semitism’s broad view – especially among anti-Semitic European nationalists - is that the interests of nation come first and that Israeli/jewish actions, beliefs and conduct towards the Palestinians is illustrative of why jews cannot be allowed to live in other nations (including - but not limited to - those of Europe and its Diaspora).

2) Because Anti-Semitism broadly supports the Palestinians at the expense of Europeans and ‘other White people like the jews’; it therefore distracts us from talking about the Great Replacement.

This is also untrue since the problem with this thesis is that firstly it assumes that the reason that anti-Semites – among nationalists anyway – support/sympathise with the Palestinians in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is for their own sake and not because jewish/Israeli behaviour towards the Palestinians provides a contemporary mirror for how jews have routinely treated Europeans in both Europe and the Diaspora – remember such things as the Nakam plot by Israeli National Poet Abba Kovner and his jewish Soviet partisan group to murder six million Germans by poisoning the water supply after the end of the Second World War, the repeated jewish attempts to exterminate the Greeks, Egyptians and Romans in Egypt (plus North Africa) and the jews actively betraying the city of Toledo to the forces of Islam in 711 A.D. – when they have gotten half the chance and will continue to do so again and again till they are stopped once for all.

The other more subtle untruth is the claim by this thesis that ‘jews are White people’; this is untrue and despite desperate attempts to argue that Ashkenazi jews ‘are really Eastern Europeans’ – even if this were true (and it isn’t) this leaves out both the Sephardim and Mizrahim who aren’t usually even seen to be remotely European as well as the assortment of other smaller jewish ethno-religious clusters such as the Dagestan Mountain jews and the Karaites – the truth is jews are broadly their own genetic group – in reality three groups clustered together – who aren’t remotely White nor European but who – like the Sami people in Scandinavia – have long been resident in Europe but are not European in the same way that the grey squirrel is widespread in the British Isles but is not British in any way, shape or form but rather an invasive foreign species from North America.

You can see from the how manipulative this thesis is as it acts as a gateway for proponents of it to introduce the ‘jewish achievement’ argument about the allegedly ‘high jewish IQ’ – this is almost certainly nonsense incidentally – and the ‘jewish contribution to civilization’, which is in reality also basically non-existent.

This then further leads into the emotional appeal to strategy that to spend time talking about the Israeli-Palestine conflict at all is time not talking about the Great Replacement; the potency of this argument is that it has a grain of truth in it in that it is – strictly speaking – an opportunity cost.

However, the problem with this claim is that it (deliberately?) mistakes once again the purpose of talking about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in that it is to point out that the behaviour of the jews in Israel towards the Palestinians is little different from that of the jews in medieval England towards the English people or that of the jews in early to mid-twentieth century Hungary against the Hungarian people.

It does not suggest that the fate of the Palestinians and/or Arabs is somehow more important or equal to that of the Europeans and their Diaspora – as Israel’s new paid lackeys want to imply and/or directly claim - but rather that we can learn from what has happened – and is happening - to the Palestinians is the fate that awaits us should the Great Replacement – which remember has been primarily orchestrated by jews – be successful and to also give us a contemporary mirror to our past to tell us: this is why our European ancestors hated jews so much and expelled them from their lands at practically every opportunity.

This is obvious from the fact that – as we have seen – jewish right-wing Zionists such as Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich and jewish left-wing anti-Zionists such as Barbara Lerner Spectre and Tim Wise; fundamentally agree on their policy prescriptions in that Israel must exist – as an implicitly or explicitly pure jewish ethno-state – while Europe, North America and Oceania are the enemies of jewry who must be neutralised/exterminated in order to make Diaspora jewry safe; both of which objectives can be achieved at one fell stroke by deporting all – or as many of – the Palestinians/Arabs (as well as assorted others like black Africans; so they don’t illegally immigrate to Israel instead [Israel has surprisingly long had a problem with illegal immigrant from black Africans claiming to be Ethiopian jews]) as possible to Europe, North America and Oceania.

Thus creating ‘Eurabia’ rather than fearing it, but all the time seeking to centralise as much of Europe and its Diaspora’s financial, intellectual and technological wealth into jewish hands as humanly possible so that the jews can neutralise the potential threat that a ‘Eurabia’ might pose, while trying to ensure Israel becomes a global superpower using this stolen wealth just as Moses Hess predicted it would in his 1862 book ‘Rome and Jerusalem’ that is one of founding intellectual documents of Zionism.

No wonder one of the newly-bought and paid for traitors – Connor Tomlinson – openly warned Yoram Hazony – the Israeli academic and philosopher behind the ‘National Conservative’ movements trying to suppress the actual right-wing and co-opt it into pro-Israel multi-cultural pluralistic tub-thumping in Europe and its Diaspora – in his pro-Israel puff piece on his Substack that he also outlined on X/Twitter; that the public declarations by senior Israeli Ministers - Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich specifically – that they want to deport all the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank (plus Arabs in general) to Europe so they can populate Gaza and the West Bank with jewish settlers are fundamentally destroying Israel’s PR/Hasbara campaign on the political right.

Tomlinson saw what many jews didn’t see – and still don’t – that in order to try and de-radicalise the right – hence why before the trip during his time on the ‘Lotus Eaters’ podcast; he was pejoratively known as ‘Containment Connor’ – and push them into the blind alley of Hazony’s ‘National Conservatism’; the jews and the Israeli government need to pose as Europe and its Diaspora’s friend and ally against the evolving demographic crisis – the whole ‘Eurabia’ theory repurposed to somewhat cover the Great Replacement – not play to the violent revenge fantasies of their jewish political audience in Israel.

This would be – and almost certainly is – impossible to do if you have senior Israeli ministers advocating the Great Replacement in public, but what Tomlinson has forgotten is the parable of the scorpion and the frog.

The scorpion asks the frog to help him cross the river on his back, the frog demurs on the basis that the scorpion will sting him and the scorpion protests loudly – and seemingly with heart-felt honesty – that he will do nothing of the kind because he will drown to.

Only for the frog mid-stream to feel a prick from the scorpion’s stinger on his back and as the poison seeps into his veins; he asks the scorpion ‘Why?’

The scorpion shrugs and informs him: ‘It is just in my nature.’

The point of the parable in this instance is the frog is Europe and the Diaspora and the scorpion is Israel and the jews; Israel and the jews are trying to hitch a ride over the rising waters of nationalist revival and revanche, because they know that they will be swept away once but that Europe and its Diaspora can cross these rising waters.

So, they want to hitch a ride, but because their nature is to hate and despise non-jews and to act in their own perceived interests; they will use Europe and its Diaspora to save themselves and in so doing deliberately murder Europe and its Diaspora so that in the end: they will survive.

Why?

Because it is in their nature.

This is why – as the meme goes – the jewish right creates the ‘refugees’ flooding Europe while the jewish left ensures the ‘refugees’ are let in.

They work hand-in-glove with each other in almost frightening synchronicity.

In truth it is not anti-Semitism that it is ‘brown-coded’ or ‘Third Worldist’ but rather Zionism and Semitism: these want to hand over all of Europe’s financial, intellectual and technological treasure to Israel and the jews that they worship as secular gods and to see the light of Europa extinguished forever.

However anti-Semitic nationalists stand in the way of this objective, because in the immortal words of Martin Luther:

‘Here we stand, we can do no other.’